While one of thought holds that government should offer free healthcare for people, others are of the opinion that allocating those funds in education and culture can provide more benefits. This essay will first closely examine both perspectives, before including that I agree with the latter.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some propose that government should provide at-no-cost medical care. The key rationale lies in the improvement of social welfare by applying free healthcare policies. In other words, citizen’s standard of living can be substantially enhanced, especially in their financial. For example, universal healthcare assits significantly in reducing disadvantaged people’s financial burdens, offering them with better medical care services.
However, the feasibility of state-funded healthcare is questionable at best, as when freeing, the needs of medical consultation increase, leading to problems such as overcrowding or lack of health equipments for patients. Moreover, abuse of the system may arise, as certain individuals could take undue advantage of free medications for minor illnesses or non-essential medical needs, thereby putting an unnecessary strain on public resources.
Furthermore, there is a strong case to be made for allocating funds in education and culture. Perhaps the foremost reason would be that both of them can pave the way for country’s development. Regarding for education, when numerous people access to a wide variety of knowledge, they are more likely to become successful. Afterwards, they might contribute their wealth back to society, which enhances national development. Moreover, government’s investment on culture plays an important role as it not only helps to safeguard national identity, but also boosts the economy through tourism.
In conclusion, while there are justifications for advocating the introduction of certain free healthcare policies, I would contend that devoting financial resources to educational and cultural yields are greater advantages.