It is often claimed that all residents should be provided with allowance by authorities, for having sufficient finances to live on irrespective of the population’s status. I partially support this position and this essay is going to report on how the government’s subsidies may foster people’s well-being and can lead to the economic slowdown.
To begin with, the allowance distributed among dwellers by the governing body promotes their welfare. That is to say, a constant basic income reduces stress, which stems from various factors, and leads to a prosperous psychological state. Consequently, this assists to nurture a healthy generation. This fact is attested by several Western countries such as Spain, Italy, the US, and Canada that provided subsidies for from 400 to 4000 low-income residents in recent decades to prove the feasibility of this system. The experiment showed positive effects on well-being and stress reduction.
However, I would argue that permanent financial aid partly contributes to a decrease in economic development. In other words, if there is a steady benefit, numerous people will not try to engage in gainful employment because of low motivation and self-discipline to work. This happens as people tend to live on the survival scale. As a result, it brings a labor shortage and a decline in the growth of the state economy. The US, Germany, and Japan, whose economies are facing wage inflation and crisis because of a deficiency of qualified employers in the labor market can be an excellent example. So, I am convinced that the most positive way to keep balance is to provide an allowance exclusively for low-income and unemployed residents for a limited period.
In conclusion, despite the positive impacts of financial aid on welfare, I believe that authorities should limit the period and the number of beneficiaries to stimulate them to develop and find well-paid jobs.