You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Governments should give each citizen a basic income so that they have enough money to live on, even if they are unemployed. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

REPORTED ON 17 JANUARY, 2022

Many suggest that each citizen of a country, whether employed or not, should have enough money to live on, and so they should be assisted financially by their respective governments. Unless in some exceptional cases, I feel this should not be practised.

The primary cause behind my disapproval is because of the fact that remuneration should be based on the extent of work a person does. This means if a person gets enough money to sustain his life, there would not be much value for the work he does. On the other side, when he earns money through his hardwork, he will be more productive and dedicated to his work.

In case of an unemployed, who gets financial benefits from the government, the motivation to get involved in work is seen diminished. The consistent support from the state makes him less-productive and he would be feeling comfortable with what he has. It is totally illogical to waste the tax-payers’ money by these means.

I need to admit that many people need to get financial assistance since they have no savings at all, and are not able to find a job. Such individuals should be given a basic income in order to carry out their daily activities. However, I feel that they can be made involved in some voluntary works which can benefit the society.

 To conclude, the idea of giving some basic financial support to every citizen is really good. Although it benefits a small proportion of people, for most, it is a demotivating factor to work.

Word count: 257