Opinions are divided on whether the state should subsidize investments in eldercare or the youth’s education. This essay will closely examine both views before concluding that I agree with the latter/ the latter would be fruitful.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some people propose that the government should spend more on senior citizens’ care. The primary reason is that individuals have devoted almost all of their lives to contributing to the country, and when they age, better care from the government could be considered a form of compensation for the early contribution. However, given that the current costs paid for pensions, the seniors’ healthcare, among others, are already colossal, subsidizing this group more would inevitably take a toll on the national coffers, thus causing budget deficits. As such, the proposal that governments should cater to the elderly more is rendered questionable.
On the other hand, I am convinced that a focus on investing in the education of the youth would be more economically advantageous. Granted, the requirements of investment in this area are no less than the money allocated to eldercare, yet such funding could be deemed as a long-term investment. This is because more money poured into the education field could give rise to a more educated workforce in the future, which acts as a precursor to a thriving economy. Expending more on the senior’s care, in contrast, may hardly generate any profits for the government. In order for a nation to thrive, it is thus suggested that the focus be diverted to the young generations’ education in lieu of the senior’s care.
In conclusion, while there are justifications that the state should give more care to the elderly, I would contend that it is better to prioritize young citizens’ education.