求雅思作文思路
Goodhealthisabasichumanneed.Somebodythinkitistheresponsibilityofthegovernmenttoensure...
Good health is a basic human need.Somebody think it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that people play sports and eat well.Others,however,think people should be free to choose their owm lifestyles.Disscuss both these views and give your own opinion.
给个思路可以,有范文更好 展开
给个思路可以,有范文更好 展开
展开全部
Healthy lifestyles are important in maintaining people’s physical fitness and metal wellness. Some people contend the government should be responsible for ensuring people have healthy lifestyles. However, others believe everyone has freedom of choice in his or her way of living.
Those who are against the government’s intervention in people’s lifestyles justify this on the ground that every individual has the right to choose their own lives. This notion is increasingly perceived as a demonstration of an enlightened and progressive society. Freedom to adapt any lifestyle is similar to other rights of citizens, such as freedom of speech. If this particular right is reasonable and acceptable to the public, so is the right to choose lifestyles. Since individuals should also be held responsible for their own behaviors, the choice in mode of life is their duty not the government’s.
When considering the government’s responsibilities, creating a sound social security system is always its priority. As public health is part of the system, encouraging individuals to adopt healthy styles of living will never be wrong. This is because the adoption of healthy lifestyles (e.g., quit smoking, keep exercising) can certainly help to decrease the number of people suffering from certain chronic diseases (e.g., obesity, high blood pressure). This will in turn lift the government’s financial burden in the area of public healthcare. Meanwhile, the state can channel more funds into other promising areas such as infrastructure construction and education system. So this move is mutually beneficial for both the economy and the government.
In my opinion, it is economically infeasible and unrealistic for the government to ensure everyone has a healthy lifestyle. Undertaking this project requires a high level of input. If more is invested in this one, there will be fewer resources available distributed in other important areas. The government, however, should still promote the importance of leading a healthy life among the public. Even though we cannot make sure everyone is following this, the more people know its importance the better.
In conclusion, I believe the government should not deprive people of rights to live their own ways. However, it is still feasible and imperative for it to educate the public about the benefits of choosing healthy lifestyles. After all, it is in the best interests of individuals and society as a whole.
Those who are against the government’s intervention in people’s lifestyles justify this on the ground that every individual has the right to choose their own lives. This notion is increasingly perceived as a demonstration of an enlightened and progressive society. Freedom to adapt any lifestyle is similar to other rights of citizens, such as freedom of speech. If this particular right is reasonable and acceptable to the public, so is the right to choose lifestyles. Since individuals should also be held responsible for their own behaviors, the choice in mode of life is their duty not the government’s.
When considering the government’s responsibilities, creating a sound social security system is always its priority. As public health is part of the system, encouraging individuals to adopt healthy styles of living will never be wrong. This is because the adoption of healthy lifestyles (e.g., quit smoking, keep exercising) can certainly help to decrease the number of people suffering from certain chronic diseases (e.g., obesity, high blood pressure). This will in turn lift the government’s financial burden in the area of public healthcare. Meanwhile, the state can channel more funds into other promising areas such as infrastructure construction and education system. So this move is mutually beneficial for both the economy and the government.
In my opinion, it is economically infeasible and unrealistic for the government to ensure everyone has a healthy lifestyle. Undertaking this project requires a high level of input. If more is invested in this one, there will be fewer resources available distributed in other important areas. The government, however, should still promote the importance of leading a healthy life among the public. Even though we cannot make sure everyone is following this, the more people know its importance the better.
In conclusion, I believe the government should not deprive people of rights to live their own ways. However, it is still feasible and imperative for it to educate the public about the benefits of choosing healthy lifestyles. After all, it is in the best interests of individuals and society as a whole.
推荐律师服务:
若未解决您的问题,请您详细描述您的问题,通过百度律临进行免费专业咨询