It is believed by a group of people that the younger population should contribute to the local community through unpaid work during their free time. It is believed that this act of community service not only helps the society, but also benefits the workers. In this essay, we shall explore both views and ultimately conclude with a solid opinion.
Firstly, let us put ourselves in the shoes of an individual who shares this viewpoint. A community cannot survive, let alone thrive, if there is no one working for it. Normally, youths have more energy, provide an alternate view about certain things, and learn just about anything in no time. This results in greater efficiency and possibly a better understanding of needs and wants. Unpaid work means the community does not have to pay them, avoiding strain on the treasury. Without this pressure, funds can be used for the betterment of the neighborhood.
This perspective sounds amazing to a person sitting at a higher rank of the town, and understandably so. However, for the teenagers and young adults, who have barely grasped the concept of life, would disagree. Around 80% of young people living in an area such as Nasirabad attend schools and colleges. This number could rise much higher for a more developed neighbourhood. Education institutions occupy much of their time. Given how most schools lean towards rote memorization, young people do not have too much free to spare anyway-they are too busy to do anything other than homeworks. Additionally, as ambitious they are, unpaid labor does not appeal as much. Though they might volunteer at first, but a week later they will burn out.
I believe work without payment is futile. As pupils, one thing most of us have learnt is that “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction”. While a physics concept, it applies in this case too. Paying them will only make them come back and work more. A small monetary incentive is enough to hold on to their interest.