There are several individuals who believe that the authorities should determine their residents’ lifestyle to stimulate a healthy life for them, while others advocate that citizens should have their own life decisions. From my perspective, I agree with the former to a certain extent and I will elaborate further in this essay.
On the other hand, it is justified for the government to take control of residents’ lives. To clarify, the government can implement several policies to restrict the consumption of citizens in some unhealthy products such as tobacco or alcohol, which can significantly prevent people from respiratory issues, in general enhancing the life expectancy among them. For example, thanks to imposing a regulation of the Canadian government to heavily punish people who smoke in public, Canadians always have high average well-being. Furthermore, through organizing certain educational campaigns, the authorities can raise awareness of residents about the vitality of maintaining a healthy lifestyle by doing sport activities or adopting a vegetarian diet on daly, which provide them an adequate life spirit, allowing them to contribute to work more productively.
On the other hand, it can not be denied that individuals should have the right to establish their own life habits. To make it clear, evidently that only individuals can completely comprehend their preferences to make choices in their routine, as a result, when the government enact a lifestyle on them, that can provide residents the sense of dependence and irritation. For instance, there were many demonstrations of the citizens in Russia in 1980, when Russian authorities decided to prohibit a type of alcohol named Volka, which is extremely popular.
In conclusion, although lifestyle determination of the government can enhance longevity among citizens as well as improve working productivity, this practice can promote irritative behavior in residents.