Retired, unemployed and disabled citizens are subsidized by governments as a means of financial assistance, yet there is an argument to be made that families should be the ones providing such support to these people in need. Each method has their own benefit and upside, this essay aims to delve into each argument fo which is better. ; on the governmental assistance side, the funding is more consistent and has higher availability, while the familial support can cater to the person’s specific needs.
On the governmental assistance side, the funding is more consistent and has higher availability. The funding for these subsidies are from taxpayers and the government themself; with a consistent income, the financial support from the government to the people in need would be consistent and would be delivered without fail. Other than consistency, governmental support would also provide all people in need an opportunity to apply and receive support, including those whose families were lost and wouldn’t receive financial support otherwise. Such availability of financial support to the public, coupled with its consistency, makes this option an all-encompassing support system for the needy.
However, a governmental financial support scheme would only be able to support the needy at the bare minimum, thus financial support from family members would be able to solve this issue. When families are the ones providing, they can cater to the person’s every need to the very minute details. For instance, buying the family member some clothes for the winter, or help pay off their water or electricity bill. Governmental funding would only provide for the bare minimum and would not be able to cover the cost of every requirement of the person in need.
In my opinion, a hybrid of both the government’s support and familial assistance is the optimal way to support a person’s needs. Governmental support can fill in the holes of familial support, which is that the person may not have a family to lean on; while familial support can mitigate the downsides of governmental assistance, which is not being able to cater to every need. With the implementation of both systems, the needy would have a consistent, yet all-rounded support system that could fulfill their wish and needs anytime, anywhere.
In conclusion, both governmental and familial financial supports can effectively provide for the needy, yet their downsides and its detrimental effects could not be ignored. With further consideration, the combination of both systems being implemented is believed to be best choice for the needy, retaining all the benefits while covering for the negatives; thus providing the needy the help they really need.