▶ Your Answer :
It is debatable whether society should put its own overall success
before the welfare of all people. I agree with the idea that the well-being of
a society can only be measured by the general welfare of all its people in that
measurement of society as a whole would not cover each person’s life and
adverse effect was reported in the world.
To begin with, the measurement of society such as GDP (Gross domestic
production) and GNP (Gross national production) would not present exact status
of ordinary citizens. For example, Beijing, capital city of china was crowded
by enormous rich number of people. The rent expenses for apartments and foods
are increasing more and more accordance with development of the city and GDP. When
seeing skyrocketed building forests in the city, everyone can agree the fact
that GDP of China showed exorbitant values compared to other developing
countries. However, in the rural regions of China, the state of the wealth is
equivalent to that of 1990s. All the building structures seem fragile and
relict and almost everyone in the cities is impoverished. The problem is that developed
and successive cities such as Beijing are comparably minute to most of China
which are in rural state. Thus, claiming that China is successive is only limited
for few percentage of people. With this respect, we should cast a doubt on this
representative success of society and realize the truth that the success was a
fictional.
However,
I agree with the concept that the whole society can represent the average of
people in some extent. When the economy of the country is increased, the
following result is company’s benefit. Then, the wealth achieved by the company
is shared by all employees who take part of almost every member of society.
Public hygiene and convenience for everyone can be guaranteed through enormous
national business. For example, public transportation like a metro are
initiated based on country’s background. In other words, the success of society
can reap a benefit for everyone. However, the optimistic condition is only
limited for the well distribution of wealth. In other words, if the company paid
minimum money for their employment, the success of country and society would
not be transferred to the public. Thus, focusing the success on society seems
dangerous and can cause negative effects on its people.
In
conclusion, although the success of society for everyone seems convincing, the
claim has defect. Thus, the society should go through the great length to
achieve private welfare of all people. |