GOVERNMENTS SHOULD HELP THEIR COUNTRIES OR OTHERS?

It is impossible to help all people in the world, so governments should only focus on people in their own countries. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The range of governments ‘ contribution has long been the subject of debate amid the public. While there are several ideas bias towards the provision of national aids to their country solely, I believe governmental support should also be concentrated on underprivileged nations.

The priority for funding is, obviously, domestic country. It is undeniable fact that national budgets originate from citizens’ taxes. Proliferating standard of living for native dwellers should, therefore, be financially supported. Another assertion is the limitation of domestic budgets. Regardless how affluent the country is, solving domestic stumbling blocks such as enhancing military equipment or fostering infrastructure systems are likely to cost a fortune. Moreover, managements to satisfy local needs have also been complicated adversities to overcome due to tight finance.

On the other hand, worldwide comprehensive support is legitimate. Evidently, the more interactions among countries are created, the more long-standing diplomatic relations are. This can benefit commercial contracts, including tax reduction and importing goods. By the same token, this national act of charity is generally associated with prevention of undesirable outcomes. A good illustration of this is the correlation between international endowment for alleviating potential threats and avoidance of infection.

In conclusion, notwithstanding the wide range of deprived nations and restrained home budgets, lending one’s neighbors a hand will almost certainly pave the road towards peace and brotherhood among countries. Considerably more efforts, especially from governments, are, hence, needed to assist their countries and on their doorstep nations simultaneously.