~4而后生~小组第3次作业

笑看红尘UID: 2280977

Issue3
"It is more important to allocate money for immediate, existing social problems than to spend it on long-term research that might help future generations."

The speaker asserts that in contemporary society immediate, existing social problems are of greater importance than long-term research concerned with future generations. While the speaker’s assertion makes sense because present social problems are marked with urgency and may cause social disasters, I must point out that long-term research relevant to benefits of our offspring cannot be neglected at the same time—on the whole, it is a matter of balance.
Admittedly, immediate social problems call for special attention and money allocated. They are concerned with life conditions and situations of present citizens, whom is a responsibility for governments to serve. What is more, without proper handling, these urgent problems may develop into greater ones, even into social disasters, like social unrests, etc. So it is obviously unwise to delay such immediate problems. Below are some examples. Unemployment has almost always been a social difficulty. While it forces individuals into poverty or even pressure of survival, unemployment may lead to severe social unrests. Next, housing may also be a great problem in modern society, which apparently affects social stability. And expensive medical care. Too expensive medical care reduces citizens’ life expectancy and casts shadows over people’s life.
However, I still have some contention with the speaker that long-time research can hardly be put aside at any time. For one thing, mankind has the obligation to take care of future generations’ benefits—the view of sustainable development, which is based on the belief that we present human beings alive have received fortune of all kinds from past generations. Future mankind is our own offspring, so how can we ignore their life conditions? Here are also some examples. Energy now has come into a crisis in modern times. If we do not attempt to develop ways to save energy present and develop new forms of energy, future generations will suffer greatly. For another, cancer studies aims at overcoming human beings’ largest natural killer. And we do not expect that our offspring still live under the great shadow in far future.
Finally, the last question lies in how to care for both simultaneously, whose answer is to strike a balance, which is, governments should make perfect budget about how to allocate money, considering the both demands, to neglect neither, and the budget may vary according to the current conditions of society. For example, if society is faced with severe urgent social problems or even a crisis, then the government has to distribute most of its money to deal with present difficulties. Yet if it is a opposite case, when society runs in healthy circumstances, the government may consider allocating more money to long-term research. In a word, carefully seeking balance is always a wise choice.
In sum, I admire the speaker’s assertion due to its calm consideration of improving societies with a fairly proper conclusion that immediate, existing social problems call for priority. However, as a supplement, I suggest the very importance of long-term research benefiting future generations, and balanced money allocation to take care both is demanded.  

happiecookieUID: 2298905

Issue3
"It is more important to allocate money for immediate, existing social problems than to spend it on long-term research that might help future generations."

The speaker asserts that in contemporary society immediate, existing social problems are of greater importance than long-term research concerned with future generations. While the speaker’s assertion makes sense because present social problems are marked with urgency and may cause social disasters, I must point out that long-term research relevant to benefits of our offspring cannot be neglected at the same time—on the whole, it is a matter of balance.
Admittedly, immediate social problems call for special attention and money allocated. They are concerned with life conditions and situations of present citizens, whom is a responsibility for governments to serve.(看着不舒服，是不是病句？) What is more, without proper handling, these urgent problems may develop into greater ones, even into social disasters, like social unrests, etc. So it is obviously unwise to delay such immediate problems. Below are some examples. Unemployment has almost always been a social difficulty. While it forces individuals into poverty or even pressure of survival, unemployment may lead to severe social unrests. （force into pressure?）Next, housing may also be a great problem in modern society, which apparently affects social stability. And expensive medical care. Too expensive medical care reduces citizens’ life expectancy and casts shadows over people’s life.
However, I still have some contention with the speaker that long-time research can hardly be put aside at any time. For one thing, mankind has the obligation to take care of(照顾利益？应该是考虑consider吧) future generations’ benefits—the view of sustainable development, which is based on the belief that we present human beings alive have received fortune of all kinds from past generations. Future mankind is our own offspring, so how can we ignore their life conditions? Here are also some examples(下面得不觉得是例子）. Energy now has come into a crisis in modern times. If we do not attempt to develop ways to save energy present and develop new forms of energy, future generations will suffer greatly. For another, cancer studies aims at overcoming human beings’ largest natural killer. And we do not expect that our offspring still live under the great shadow in far future.
Finally, the last question lies in how to care for both simultaneously, whose answer is to strike a balance, which is, governments should make perfect budget about how to allocate money, considering the both demands, to neglect neither, and the budget may vary according to the current conditions of society. For example, if society is faced with severe urgent social problems or even a crisis, then the government has to distribute most of its money to deal with present difficulties. Yet if it is an opposite case, when society runs in healthy circumstances, the government may consider allocating more money to long-term research. In a word, carefully seeking balance is always a wise choice.
In sum, I admire the speaker’s assertion due to its calm consideration of improving societies with a fairly proper conclusion that immediate, existing social problems call for priority. However, as a supplement, I suggest the very importance of long-term research benefiting future generations, and balanced money allocation to take care(小心，当心？) both is demanded.