There are two approaches to handle illnesses around the world. One is preventing it even before people get sick, the other is to treat after people fall ill. Governments spend more money on the later. I agree that the world governments should spend more on prevention than on cure.
When there is a proliferation of a virus, Government has no choice other than to spend a huge amount of money on the recovery. If no action is taken, it might lead to a major disaster in the society. Governments may argue that its inevitable and cannot be avoided. Apart from that, it's essential for Governments to protect their citizens from any illness or disabilities arising from it, for example, if a person gets into an unfortunate accident, he may not be able to afford a living. Hence, the Government needs to provide some benefits for the disabled. It's the responsibility of Governments to handle all these situations.
However, Governments can avoid too much expenditure on treatment by avoiding the illness or injury. It could encourage people to get vaccinated by offering it for free or a minimum charge which anyone can afford. It can also impose strict rules and regulations on industries and factories to make sure they follow a good safety protocol. On top of that, it could make restaurants obligated to follow clean and healthy practices. Finally, it could also provide some benefits like tax reduction for healthcare companies that encourage the insured to follow a preventive care. So it's clear that Government has a plethora of options to improve the health and well being of its citizens.
In conclusion, even though the Government is left with no option if an epidemic disease occurs in a society, it can take a lot of proactive measures that will avoid any epidemic or any illness to occur in the first place. So governments should stop spending on treating the illness after it occurred and should concentrate on preventing it altogether.
There are two approaches to handle
illnesses
around the world. One is preventing it even
before
people
get
sick, the other is to treat after
people
fall ill.
Governments
spend more money on the
later
. I
agree
that the world
governments
should spend more on prevention than on cure.
When there is a proliferation of a virus,
Government
has no choice other than to spend a huge amount of money on the recovery. If no action
is taken
, it might lead to a major disaster in the society.
Governments
may argue that its inevitable and cannot
be avoided
. Apart from that, it's essential for
Governments
to protect their citizens from any
illness
or disabilities arising from it,
for example
, if a person
gets
into an unfortunate accident, he may not be able to afford a living.
Hence
, the
Government
needs to provide
some
benefits for the disabled. It's the responsibility of
Governments
to handle all these situations.
However
,
Governments
can avoid too much expenditure on treatment by avoiding the
illness
or injury. It could encourage
people
to
get
vaccinated by offering it for free or a minimum charge which anyone can afford. It can
also
impose strict
rules
and regulations on industries and factories to
make
sure they follow a
good
safety protocol.
On top of that
, it could
make
restaurants obligated to follow clean and healthy practices.
Finally
, it could
also
provide
some
benefits like tax reduction for healthcare
companies
that encourage the insured to follow a preventive care.
So
it's
clear
that
Government
has a plethora of options to
improve
the health and
well being
of its citizens.
In conclusion
,
even though
the
Government
is
left
with no option if an epidemic disease occurs in a society, it can take
a lot of
proactive measures that will avoid any epidemic or any
illness
to occur in the
first
place.
So
governments
should
stop
spending on treating the
illness
after it occurred and should concentrate on preventing it altogether.