In Today’s World Private Companies Rather Than Government Pay for and Conduct Scientific Research IELTS Writing Task 2

First off, these private organisations, as opposed to public ones, are frequently driven by the need to make money. As a result, when they make a scientific discovery, they will immediately use it to further their financial objectives. Any new products will consequently become very expensive and almost unavailable to the general public as a result. For example, if a pharmaceutical company develops cancer treatment, the therapy will be expensive. And many people will be unable to buy it. It comes as no surprise that many people struggle without these medications.

Furthermore, these particular companies could weaponize the most recent technologies. These machines were developed with a lot of time and money spent, therefore it is very possible that they will be sold to the highest bidder. Both domestic and international peace and security may suffer as a result of this. Or even worse, it might end up in the hands of any terrorist groups. Therefore, private businesses may be very untrustworthy and even dangerous. 

Nevertheless, the commercialization of science has some advantages. The lack of red tape is one of the main advantages. Privately owned businesses rarely have time-consuming or unnecessary procedures. They speed up results delivery and optimise every functioning area. For instance, privately held laboratories may develop vaccinations twice as quickly as those run by the government. Similar to how the former uses fewer resources than the latter to accomplish the goal.

In conclusion, both sides of the debate can be supported by logical reasoning. But in my opinion, the drawbacks of technology misuse are too severe to be overlooked. And as a result, they greatly exceed the advantages. Misuse of these innovations could trigger another world war.

Modern studies take a lot of time, thus they cannot ensure that future earnings will be sufficient to pay for a given company's significant expenses. It is also apparent that the country's budget is totally dependent on corporate investments and taxis. Therefore it is easy to assume that the county and its residents would suffer if the government didn't pay the wages out of the overall revenue.

However, if the government does not keep an eye on the experimental processes, there will soon be major issues. In other words, some unlawful businesses willingly contribute funds to projects. Such as developing nuclear weapons or creating new drugs that are taken from tainted plants and chemicals. As a result, it is more possible that research pollutants will end up in the environment and nature. It could result in a number of natural disasters like contamination and disruption of the eco-balance in the wildlife. In order to overcome the future implications of that law-against gangs and criminals, the government must eventually enforce certain rules. Or even personally supervise these tests. Therefore, it is crucial that the government make every effort to be informed of any research or project taking place within their country's boundaries.

In conclusion, I think governments will be able to maintain their minorities in nations, whether it be in the political or technological spheres.

We must examine the quantity of investment when evaluating the benefits provided by private businesses. Over the previous few decades, business corporations have advanced significantly to the point where they are now referred to as giants. Government subsidies for scientific research, on the other side, are trailing behind since the emphasis has switched to the military. And even education is underfunded. Therefore, scientists are compensated by private businesses. They will have the freedom to carry out any type of experiment, along with clinical trials, that is necessary to materialise their original notion. The industry, unlike governmental organisations, is fully equipped with plants and manufacturing lines to manufacture on an enormous scale. Especially in the case that such an idea can be exploited to make a profit.

These benefits do not, however, change the fact that science does not pay as much as other professions. Petroleum or soccer clubs, for instance, would be better alternatives to invest in. If a company wanted to generate money because they boost the brand's profit and marketing potential. The general public would be sceptical of an industry's decision to fund anything that harms the sector itself. It is doubtful whether the scientists have the authority to take into account every potential aspect of the problem. People will be unwilling to believe in the authenticity of any discovery made, even though scientists have such rights to do so.

I conclude that, while suspicion is unavoidable, more investigation by the private sector will lead to more innovation and improvement in everyday life.