There are a lot of controversies surrounding the allocation of monthly stipends to the unemployed population of a country. People opine that those without work should receive some sort of benefits,
however
, it is opposed by some with the argument that it is completely wasteful. I concur with the latter that argues it is totally unnecessary and not needed.
Many advocate that adults who are jobless should be paid incomes by the government. They state that Linking Words
this
money being paid to these class of individuals will help ameliorate the perpetration of crime. They Linking Words
also
attribute the high rate of a felony in society to unemployment, supporting their claims with the unavailability of cash to these set of people. Linking Words
On the contrary
, Linking Words
although
they have a valid point, I believe Linking Words
otherwise
, with the opinion that crimes Linking Words
such
as murder, rape, child abuse, prostitution could be committed willingly. A study showed that teenagers both girls and boys got into the sex trade due to their sexual fetish, not for the revenue.
Linking Words
Furthermore
, those with an opposite view supports their decision on the grounds that these funds remitted would of course facilitate laziness and idleness. With the knowledge that they would be paid, the unemployed choose to remain so because they see no need to work. As obviously, all their needs are being catered for. I strongly believe Linking Words
this
, because, definitely a man who is fed sees no reason to be productive to himself or the society. An example, a middle-aged man who believes that all his problems should and could be solved by the government would choose to stay idle.
To sum up, Linking Words
although
each view has unflinching evidence to their stands on the topic of whether those who are out of work should be paid or not. I reiterate my opinion that paying them would make them entirely lazy and useless.Linking Words