Everywhere we turn, nowadays we see charities beseeching the public for money. Whether in the many 'begging letters' that pop unsolicited through our mailboxes daily or in the televised appeals for charities, headed by celebrities
trying to tug at our heartstrings. . . . the question is, which charities deserve to be funded and which should be
given priority in government funding? Are sports and recreation charities more worthy of a cause for example, than
health charities? This is a major dilemma that is by no means a clear-cut issue.
Let's take sports and recreation charities compared to health charities as a case in point. The former has a valid
claim to government funding. Sport and recreation help reduce stress and keep people fit, positive, and healthy. In
addition, sports and recreation centers also provide a community focal point, enriching the lives of many.
However, what good is recreation and sport if you are too unwell to participate? There is a much stronger argument,
that health is a far greater priority than sport and recreation.
Furthermore, an increasingly aged population is becoming a heavy burden on healthcare, necessitating greater fund-
ing for charities as the prevalence of Alzheimer's and cancer increases proportionally with an aging population. Many
now are reliant on support from health charities. We have an obligation to fund these charities, in return.
I believe that the funding of health charities is the greater priority. After all, what good are health and recreation
centers if we don’t have enough hospitals for people who are suffering? Without a doubt, government funding must be
directed first and foremost to health charities.
Everywhere we turn, nowadays we
see
charities
beseeching the public for money. Whether in the
many
'begging letters' that pop unsolicited through our mailboxes daily or in the televised appeals for
charities
, headed by celebrities
trying to tug at our heartstrings.
.
.
.
the
question is, which
charities
deserve to
be funded
and which should be
given
priority in
government
funding
? Are
sports
and
recreation
charities
more worthy of a cause
for example
, than
health
charities
? This is a major dilemma
that is
by no means a
clear
-
cut
issue.
Let
's take
sports
and
recreation
charities
compared to
health
charities
as a case in point. The former has a valid
claim to
government
funding
.
Sport
and
recreation
help
reduce
stress
and
keep
people
fit,
positive
, and healthy. In
addition,
sports
and
recreation
centers
also
provide a community focal point, enriching the
lives
of
many
.
However
, what
good
is
recreation
and
sport
if you are too unwell to participate? There is a much stronger argument,
that
health
is a far greater priority than
sport
and recreation.
Furthermore
, an
increasingly
aged population is becoming a heavy burden on healthcare, necessitating greater fund-
ing
for
charities
as the prevalence of Alzheimer's and cancer increases
proportionally
with an aging population.
Many
now
are reliant on support from
health
charities
. We have an obligation to fund these
charities
, in return.
I believe that the
funding
of
health
charities
is the greater priority.
After all
, what
good
are
health
and recreation
centers if we don’t have
enough
hospitals for
people
who are suffering? Without a doubt,
government
funding
must
be
directed
first
and foremost to
health
charities
.