Powerful measure of a country depends on whether the people welfare, do not look great in achievement
Introduction
Various indicators can be used to measure the success of a nation, with a primary focus being the general welfare of its citizens. What constitutes a great successful nation? This is usually a subject of contention, and different people have perspectives on the subject matter. Some argue that an indicator of a successful nation can be measured using the welfare of its entire citizens, while others are of the opinion that the achievements of its rulers and few elite people in the country makes it a great nation. The first viewpoint is more accurate in the quest to determine the powerful measure of a nation. Basing on this sentiments, it is arguably evident that the powerful measure of a country depends on whether the people welfare, do not look great in achievement. The basic implication of this is that the achievement of a nation’s great people such as its politicians and scientists, cannot be used as an indicator for the success of a nation; this is because that are just a small proportion of the country’s population. The achievements of a country cannot be used to measure the welfare of its citizens under any account. Therefore, they cannot be used to represent the welfare of the whole country. This means that the powerful measure of a country is determined by the achievement of its citizens rather than the achievement of a few elite groups in the country. Some nations have some of the greatest scientists, rulers, politicians and elites, but they do not constitute a great nation under any account. A typical example of such a country is Russia, which boasts of great scientist but most of the citizens are languishing in poverty. Such a country cannot be said to be great even if it has significant contributions to scientific research, which ultimately does not seem to appear to be of help to its citizens.
In order to emphasize that that the powerful measure of a country depends on whether the welfare of the people, do not look great in achievements, it is vital to compare the characteristics of great countries in order to draw the correlation between the success of the nation, the welfare of the people. In addition, it is also vital to analyze whether the achievements of the country is a major indicator of better welfare and better living standards for its population. The basic argument is that a great nation puts the welfare of its citizens first rather than its achievements. In fact, a better welfare contributes to greater achievement of nation and not the vice versa. For example, the United States can be considered a great nation because it prioritizes the welfare of its citizens compared to its achievements as a nation.
The greatness of a country is not subject to its achievements, say at the global political arena. For instance, most of the Arabian countries are rich in oil, and they are using this advantage to claim a geopolitical position in global politics. The underlying fact is that despite the fact that these countries have huge oil reserves, the living standards of their citizens are poor and the citizens are benefiting from the fact that their countries have rich oil reserves. In fact, only the political groups are the beneficiaries of such resources. Libya is a perfect example of such a case, which recently witnessed food riots due to increasing cost of living yet the country has rich oil reserves that can be used to improve the living standards of its citizens. Such countries cannot be considered great, irrespective of the role that they play in international politics. In order to sum up, it is more accurate to state that the greatness of a country is not determined by its achievements, rather the welfare of its citizens.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|