As the responsibility of governments is to protect their national boundaries, many people assume that it is more worthy to invest in the defense system rather than focus on social benefits. However, I firmly believe that both aspects should receive similar expenditure.
On the one hand, it is undeniable that national defense expenses are essential for protecting a country’s safety. This is due to the urgent and serious threat posed by the military buildup of hostile countries. Specifically, there are underlying conflicts among regions, manifesting in various forms such as economic competition and political controversies, which can lead to detrimental humanitarian issues. For instance, the ongoing conflict in Palestine involves significant violence and destruction, stemming from long-standing disputes between two nations. Increasing government investment in the military provides the country with comprehensive military strategies and a well-trained defense system to handle such situations immediately.
On the other hand, improving national defense does not mean that spending on social benefits should be reduced. A country still faces numerous serious problems that require attention, such as overpopulation, traffic congestion, and overwhelming pollution, which negatively affect living conditions and contribute to long-term environmental degradation. Therefore, the national budget must be appropriately allocated to address these needs. For example, introducing high-tech medical equipment can enhance the quality of healthcare services, thereby improving citizens’ quality of life. Only by fulfilling social demands for better living conditions can citizens live comfortably.
To conclude, while I agree that increasing government aid for military defense can benefit a country’s safety, I firmly object to reducing expenses for social benefits.