Instead of training a few athletes to win medals at the Olympics, governments should spend the money on programmes encouraging the public to be active and stay healthy. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Sport is a beneficial activity for each age group and competitive ones take place in Olympiads for centuries. Each year, dozens of sportsmen from various countries join races and governments of those spend money to train youngsters for the Olympics. Some people claim that money should be spent on programmes which lead people to sport to be healthy. I believe a healthy society is more important than medals. The relation between health and physical activity is a well-known fact. Encouraging people to sport may decrease health expenditures of the government in a roundabout way. Regular physical activity, for instance a thirty-minute walk, regulates blood pressure and reduces the risk of heart attack. However, especially in megacities, it is hard to find a proper walking trial. Since it is basic need, authorities should spend money of the citizens to meet the need of the citizens rather than to train a few sportsmen. Governments, especially those in developing countries, see the Olympics as a chance to promote their lands. However, given the current states of their economies, it does not seem logical to use of public saving on a few athletes. Undoubtedly, Olympics are not cost-effective and there are cheaper ways for advertisements. Besides, countries can support self-trained athletes rather than to evocate a new person. Investments on public health would generet more profit in the long term. In conclusion, if governments give up to train new athletes or even to participate Olympics, they can invest on new areas such as public sport centers.