▶ Your Answer : Undoubtedly, it is of great importance for nations to deal with an economic crisis. For this purpose, many developed and developing countries had implemented various policies like reducing its budget for less important fields in their countries. It appears that most of the national leaders agree that it is inevitable to decrease governmental spending on parks and public gardens to get through a financial crisis. I am with them on such argument for the two subsequent reasons which I am going to elaborate. First and foremost, investment in parks and public gardens is not closely related to improving the gross domestic product. On the other hands, spending in arts or scientific research can contribute to making financial profits in various industries. Therefore, when the government reduces its spending on parks and utilize it to other promising parts, it is likely to bring a better result in controlling the crisis. Take an economic crisis in South Korea in 1997 for instance. South Korea suffered from a financial crisis at the time due to a low level of foreign currency reserves. To escape from the crisis, the government started to reduce its budget for less important sectors including national parks and public gardens and invest more money in science fields related to electronics and biology. Fortunately, it was very successful because thanks to developments in basic science, a lot of enterprises including Samsung Electronics, were able to make a great success in each field, which as a result in increasing household income. Were it not been for the decision to cut down on its budget for parks, Korean would have been much in trouble by now.
On top of that, when the government spend too much money on parks and gardens, it could have a negative influence on the overall economy. This is because if there are a lot of parks near workplaces, most of the employees may want to take a rest rather than put in more effort into their work. This tendency might deter workers from focusing on their tasks, thereby reducing annual income. For instance, in the United Kingdom, the rate of increase in GDP per capita has been decreased since the nineteenth century. Many experts blamed it for a surge in the number of parks and gardens in major cities such as London and Manchester. The most contributing factor was that white-collar workers preferred to recharge their batteries near parks during working hours rather than focusing their work. Unfortunately, because of this, UK experienced a shortage of workers and labor productivity was lowered ever than before. This implies that government policy about the usage of its budget is the key to improving a nation's financial status.
In conclusion, if the government lessens its money on parks and gardens, it can not only invest it in other lucrative fields but also prevent the nation from decreasing its labor productivity. In this regard, I firmly believe that over the course of an economic crisis, the government should reduce its budget for parks and public gardens for the aforementioned reasons.
|