It is often claimed that our country is social-oriented. From an economic standpoint, governmental expenditures are considered to be one of the most cost-effective methods of pursuing a social policy. For this reason, in 2010 more than a half of our budget was allocated for social sphere. Even though, it is a great amount of money, it is still limited. Consequently, we should choose whether to help the poor or to develop sport. One of the main arguments for developing sport is that it makes nation healthier.

Generally it results in retrenching expenses on medical care, improving demographic situation, standard of living and life expectancy. It is widely argued that healthy way of life solves social problems. This is clearly illustrated by the fact that physical activities rally families. What is more, for many people it’s the only sphere to show their worth. It is often claimed, that everybody is equal in sport, which means that without spending money on sport, our society wouldn’t be able to make sport available and support persons of natural gifts. In addition, most people point out a psychological effect of sport achievements.

For instance, the fact that the representative of the country wins the Olympic games inspire ordinary people and make them be proud of their native land, not to mention that international victories make the image of the country more prestigious. However, skeptics claim this argument is misguided. By and large, the percentage of prominent sportsmen is low, besides, there is a tendency among our sportsmen to emigrate and represent another country on all kinds of international competitions, while a great amount of money has already been spent on his/her training.

As a result, very few people can glorify our country and we bear waste expenses. What is more, opponents of spending money on sport are convinced that primary needs should be satisfied first. In particular, a matter of considerable controversy at present is that great ice-palaces are being built, while some people make desperate attempts to earn their leaving. Another argument in favor of helping the poor is that as far as our government is social- oriented, it is obliged to protect economically vulnerable people.

In most cases, poor people have objective reasons and do deserve governmental financial help. Among those who are indigent are pensioners, who worked and paid taxes all their lives, women in a maternity leave and disabled people. All in all, it is easy to understand all the advantages and prospects of concentrating expenses on sport. In spite of this, however, I am inclined to believe that there are no valid reasons to spend too much money on sport to the prejudice of the poor.