the promotion of economy
A faction of the society claims that promoting economy should be government's prioritized task. I disagree with this view because I believe that government should put more effort into enhancing social services such as education and healthcare.
The chief drawback of putting the entire impetus on developing economy is that it shall lead to a significant gap between wealthiness and poverty, in which upper-class citizens gain benefits while people in lower-class gain nothing. Economic promotion is associated with valuable investment opportunities that only business tycoons can afford as they are available with colossal fund access. Whereas it does not help people from low social strata escape poverty. For example, in Russia, economic development outweighs any other aspects of society that satisfy politicians and the upper strata. However, their citizens are impoverished and disadvantaged in many ways, leading them to participate in various demonstrations and rallies that clearly depict the government's apathy.
In contrast, a government that proactively steps to raise the quality of education and healthcare system shall enhance the living standard of the citizen in general. The countries who put efforts in ensuring a higher quality of life for their people turn out to be a more robust economy in the long run because the return-on-investment as healthier people, knowledgable youngsters, and highly skillful workers outweigh the cost invested in the improvement. A befitting example of the case is Japan, as the government emphasizes improving social services such as education and healthcare instead of the economy. This has led to a society with educated minds taking the companies to even more economic heights.
In conclusion, I agree entirely that public health and education services should be prioritized as they are the driving factors of a long-term solid economy.