The limited age range of political participation has sparked the intense debate that the younger generation should take critical roles in government. However, some people insist that the significant political participation of the young has negative influence, whereas others believe that it is a positive development. This essay will discuss both sides of the argument in detail and provide evidence as to why the young generation should take on crucial government positions.
On the one hand, I agree that giving important works to the young can be problematical due to the lack of experience. Juniors are still on their way to develop professional careers unlike seniors, who have experiences as a leader. Thus, the former lacks of ability to control pressure stems from the heavy responsibilities or leadership, which is essential to run the administration. However, I believe that these skills are acquirable if there is a suitable assist.
On the other hand, what youngers can offer to make national decisions is priceless. Currently the majority of administrative workers consists of the old generations, who are over 60-year old in average. This leads to limited policies that are mainly focused on senior citizens. However, if the youngsters can take parts in administrative decisions, they will be able to provide broader outlook and creativity that the current imparliament lacks of. This would be vital to solve problems we are facing. For instance, new generations can give insights to low birth-rates and high unemployment-rates, since they are the ones who are actually in the middle of the issues. Therefore, I believe that wider range of age will give new breakthroughs to run the government.
To conclude, this essay discussed both perspectives of the statement that young people should not work as crucial government employees. I firmly believe that this movement will be beneficial due to the change they can bring.