Some governments provide financial assistance for retired, unemployed and disabled citizens. In other countries, families provide support for these people. Discuss both systems and give your opinion about which one you think is better

Monetary help during distressing periods in a person's life, like loss of job, retirement and physical disability is an important part of social security. In some parts of the world,

this

support is provided by the government and in others, the community takes care of it. In

this

essay, I will talk about both systems and explain why I strongly believe that the model of government assistance is better.

Firstly

, many countries have laws that guarantee their citizens financial aid in the event of physical or mental incapacitation, period of unemployment and post-retirement.

This

system is usually followed in developed European nations

for example

, Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark. The corpus for his stipend comes from social security tax deducted from the salary of all its citizens monthly.

Although

this

system provides mental peace in times of financial hardship, it

also

results in a high taxation rate.

In contrast

, families are the primary support providers in case of an unfortunate event in most developing Asian countries.

For instance

, many individuals in India invest in privately funded contingency schemes that guarantee money in case of an unforeseen tragedy. Private health insurance and pension schemes are

also

immensely popular in India as the onus of help falls on the immediate family.

While

it is useful to have the comfort of seeking help from our near and dear ones, it puts the poor at a significant disadvantage as their salaries are insufficient to provide adequate financial help. In conclusion, though both approaches have advantages and disadvantages, I believe that the government-assisted financial model is better as it ensures fair wages to all irrespective of the status of their families.