The government money should be invested in teaching science rather than other subjects so as to help the country make progress and develop. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Issues related to government investment are frequently discussed these days. It is argued that due to limited government’s funds, learning in

science

should be supported rather than other material in order to develop the country. I firmly disagree with

this

assertion and the explanation will be discussed. The principal reason to consider is that the equity movements. Not only in terms of humanity but

also

in education issues. Generally, all topics should be interested in governing funding at the same level since they are connecting in the modern world.

This

means that

science

cannot be great without support from other subjects

such

as mathematics and history.

For instance

, Thailand is one of the most famous countries in terms of tourist destinations because of historical Thai architecture which has a positive impact on economic terms. Another point is that

science

projects are not the only issue that expresses the nation’s development. In fact, nowadays, the city developments including living standard are the most subject which many developed countries are interesting.

Thus

, apart from learning

science

, others

such

as urban development and economics should be supported by the government.

Besides

, arts and sports study

also

have a positive result in children like

science

course. To exemplify,

Although

India has many great students in

science

education, India still becomes an undeveloped country owing to scarcity problems. All things considered, I am of the opinion that

science

funding is a great investment but it is not the only thing that can help the nation’s improvement.

Therefore

, government money should be carefully considered in each country with their own decisions what are suitable for their societies.