It was a good rule that people are no longer allowed to smoke in many public places and office buildings. Some people may say smoking was a kind of individual right, and stopping smoking was beyond civil`s rights. However, smoking in the public places aroused adverse effects other people. Also If governments will ban the smoking in the public places, they can reduce public welfare fees.
Illegalizing smoking in many public places and office buildings is an excellent law. Some people may say that they have a freedom to smoke, and banning smoking is invading their rights. However, public smoking affects other non-smokers in an adverse way. Also if governments enforce this law, they can reduce public welfare budget.
First of all, smoking in the public places aroused adverse effects other people. Public place was built to provide all people with convenience. In other words, It should pursue every people`s benefits. However, If some people smoke in some places, it caused an adverse effect to other people. When I was in a college, one of my friends smoked in the public library. As soon as he smoked in the reference room, A woman who sat next to him started cough. Also I started having headache that he smoked a few minutes later. The acting led to adverse effect to the woman and me. For those reasons, it was not a good act that people smoked in the public places.
First of all, smoking in public areas negatively influence other people. Public areas were built to provide citizens with convenience. In other words, they should pursue every person's benefit. However, if people can smoke anywhere, non-smokers will suffer from it. When I was in college, one of my friends smoked in the public library. As sonas he started smoking in the reference room, the woman who sat next to him started coughing. I also started having headache after a few minutes. This action led to adverse effect to the woman and me. As shown in this example, it is not tolerable at all to smoke in public places.
Second, if governments will ban the smoking in the public places, they can reduce public welfare fees. Governments spent a lot of money on paying public welfare fees. If people will keep on stopping smoking in the public places, government can spend the money more useful. For example, the government spent more money to support disabling people with the money which was scheduled to preventing smoking in the public places.
Second, if governments ban smoking in public plaes, they can cut the public welfare budget. Governments spend a lot of money on public welfare. If people stop smoking in public places, government can spend the money in more useful place. For example, the government can spend more money to support disabled people with the money which was scheduled to preventing smoking in public places.
복지비용이 어떻게 낭비가 되나 더 정확히 써주면 좋겠어요 :)
In conclusion, It was a good policy that people are no longer allowed to smoke in many public places and office buildings. First, smoking in the public places could negative effects to other people. Second, if governments will ban the smoking in the public places, public welfare fees can be more useful.
In conclusion, it is a good policy to illegalize smoking int public places and office buildings. First, smoking in public places have negative effects on other people. Second, governments can use welfare budget in effectively. |