In contemporary times, a government has a fundamental responsibility to its citizens to safeguard from many threats. In spite of the 21st century, guarantee of resident safety remains relevant because of tension between countries. Therefore, the government should still allocate a large amount of money to military services. Some people think that financial resources spending on defense should increase while spending on social benefits can be cut with that. While I agree with some aspects of the argument, I disagree with its overall conclusion.
Military investment cannot come at the price of social spending since social aspects have the same importance for a country’s survival and development as a military force. The government has the same responsibility to its residents for other high-priority necessities such as education, medicine, accommodation and ets. From my point of view, if healthcare funding is reduced, the country decreases the average human lifespan which has a profound impact for the whole country. Social programs such as retirement plans, disability assistance, one-off childbirth benefits and subsidized housing are no less important than military investment. On the other hand, when the lives of citizens are in direct danger, the government should transfer all possible money from the other country’s institutions to safety. I am of the opinion that this strategy is effective for some countries, where there is tension between peace and war.
In conclusion, it is clear that every government should make decision according to the part of financial investment in the military or other country’s institutions depending on the current state of the country.