In recent years, some people argue that tax money should be invested in health care. Others, However, maintain that other areas should be prioritized. Although sustainability in medical service remains long-term advantages, I believe all infrastructures should be benefited from available resources.
Allocating resources to health care is considered to be a long-term investment, since it prevents costly remediable diseases. Preventing, controlling, and treating diseases at early stages is definitely more budget-friendly and result-oriented, while procrastinating can lead to fatal experiences and high costs. If governments facilitate the public with simple preventive and free annual check-outs, various diseases can definitely be cured. For instance, in the UK cancer is targeted to be suppressed by 2025 and the whole medication includes free checking and observing middle-aged every two years.
However, critics argue that government budget allocation should also consider infrastructure development, which has economic impacts. Transport, communication, power supplies, and buildings known as infrastructures are the basis of a country in order to develop and flourish economically. Furthermore, investing in all these areas can strengthen the society and improve the overall quality of life, which is representative of economic growth. In 1938, the Shah of Iran, Reza Shah, started an infrastructural revolution by constructing railways and official modern buildings which resulted in the prosperity of the country in the successive decades.
In conclusion, while investing in health care is essential for preventing serious diseases and high costs, there should be an impartial distribution of resources, especially regarding fundamental facilities to progress at all aspects in a country.