It is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle to prevent illness than to spend it on the treatment of people who are already ill. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some

people

believe that spending public funds on encouraging a healthy lifestyle to avoid diseases is more essential than investing in treating

people

who already suffered from the disease. In my viewpoint, each criterion has its own effectiveness. On the one hand, I would agree that building a great lifestyle effect a higher standard of

life

.

In other words

, the government spends funds on repairing various social facilities which improve the public environment

such

as squares, parks,...

Therefore

decline

pollution

Change preposition

in pollution

show examples

which benefits

for

Change preposition

apply

show examples

people

’s physical health and mental health.

In addition

, spending money on enhancing citizens

life

which absolutely increases the performance of the

next

generation.

For example

, the children will be born without congenital disease unless their parents have any issues.

On the other hand

, I

also

think that invest money in treatment not only provides

people

with highly effective therapies but

also

prevents potential hazards in the future. Day by day, with the varieties of diseases, the improvement of medical technology plays a fundamental role in enhancing the quality of

life

.

For example

, the percentage of

people

who have already been vaccinated against the Corona Virus has reduced the mortality rate when infected. In conclusion, there is no doubt that public funds are extremely crucial for both aspects. Public money from the governments can level up the performance of

life

and prevent disease before

people

suffer from illness. Both criteria will have a positive result in the death rate.