Supporters tend to extoll job satisfaction for many of its profits that deserve to be enhanced. Admittedly, work contentment can act as a reinforcement of an organisation's revenue. More useful than a feeling of disatisfaction which might also undermine total labour productivity, keeping employees satisfied therefore can effectively lead to higher sales, a stronger bottom line, sometimes a turning point for companies having economic burden. As these contributions are largely for the enterprise, employees should be entitled to require the essence of career fulfilment. The absence of this status will possibly cause several physical and mental health issues.

On the other side of the debate are realists who suggest that workers should seek alternatives to job contentment. In spite of exceeding or poor performance at work, employees still can be fired without reasons, which indeed, makes a sense of security more important than a sense of satisfaction. In such situations, companies should provide a guarantee position otherwise face with minor employees remain. Moreover, job security is established which means a boost to that organisation's reputation. 

In conclusion, it is nothing new when workers need job satisfaction or job security. Although it is possible to raise happiness emotions at the workplace, I believe it is more crucial for them to have a permanent vacancy by virtue of higher unemployment rate and living standard in recent years.

Supporters tend to extol job satisfaction for many of its profits that deserved to be enhanced. Admittedly, the more satisfaction employees gain at their work, the more productive they are. That status can lead to a reinforcement of an organisation's revenue. Telling examples for this can be the sense of enjoyment, happiness and motivation, which are unforgettable in every enterprise. Otherwise, those companies rarely have a turning point while having an economic burden.

On the other side of the debate are those who  suggest that workers should seek alternatives to job contentment because of its unsustainability in one's future  life. It is, in fact, less crucial than a sense of security as a result of higher living standard and job scarcity. Job security seems to have no connection with job fulfilment, but in the grand scheme, it is actually the starting point of all. It’s no surprise that once a guarantee is established in a workplace, satisfaction can then be fulfilled by the feelings of belonging to an inherent community. 

In conclusion, it is nothing new when workers need job satisfaction or job security. Although job satisfaction can increase job productivity, I strongly believe it is more vital for them to have a permanent vacancy by virtue of higher unemployment rate and life quality in recent years.

The fear of an blind imitation resulting from an absolute infatuation with idols is nothing new. Although there is some truth in that idolising a popular person is liberating, it can, at the same time, make us unable to distinguish right from wrong. Without this ability and copying needs from celebrities, we undoubtedly follow their bad behaviours in a bid to achieve the sense of belonging and closeness. Chasing a lavish lifestyle, using drugs is one of many undesired consequences of this reality. 

Not only can admiring stars promote those negative behaviours, it also can be translated into positive motivation. Many celebrities are often regarded as the epitome of success, influence and reliability in their major, which are the outcome everyone wishes to achieve once in a lifetime. Therefore, in some aspects, following well-known people means learning from their virtues, recipe for success, and even their effort to overcome difficulties. But this is a rather over simplistic take on matter, and even if it is true, the numbers are low.

Although idolisation seems to bode well for personal attitude, the benefits are often short lived and its drawbacks will eventually triumph. It is a consensus that mọi người vẫn theo đuổi thần tượng uncontrollably, with so little apparent concern for the risks involved. 

Supporters tend to extol family celebrations for many of its profits that deserve to be organized elaborately. Admittedly, these are special occasions held nearly once a year. Rather than being given presents, having a domestic party is highly desirable by parents. The sense of happiness and relaxation will then come as a result of that family reunion. As these contributions are surprisingly crucial for the family members, it should have a large payment and be carefully organised. Without financial support, many families could rarely hold a celebration and create connections between members.

On the other side of the debate are realists who think that many people are wasting money to have so many celebrations a year. Those special parties, in fact, had to be prepared at great cost, which might create a financial burden for lower income families. Holding family reunions seems to be the fastest way to burn money, but in the grand scheme of things, it is rarely a problem with expenditure. Having little capacity to celebrate family ceremonies, almost all efforts to engage with families would be a lost cause.

In conclusion, it is nothing new when many people are investing so much money on domestic occasions so as to have an unforgettable day with family. Although it might become a strain to many individuals, I strongly believe it is even more deserved to have family celebrations, no matter the cost.

Supporters tend to extoll arts for many of its social contributions that should be funded to gain ground. Admittedly, arts play a key role in preserving one culture, which is crucial in today's integration era. Every value is likely to be assimilated in this modern world while the state rarely can protect arts creating the country's identity, hence in danger of being deleted on the world map. Another reason why art such as songs, poems and photos should receive financial support is owing to its conveyance of a country's image. Data have pointed out that choices of many visitors for travelling came from their interest in a country from arts. This irrefutably can promote the tourism industry and can expand tax revenue for the government.

On the other side of the debate are realists who suggest that artists should seek alternatives, in tandem with governmental funding. As a result of its intangible value, arts historically are falsely created. This might lead to embezzlement when many crimes have found a way to misuse art. Being subjected to the fickle taste of the mass, the outcome of arts is unclear and even, non-profit. In such situations, a few wealthy patrons are willing to endorse art permanently.

In conclusion, providing the state's subsidy for art is nothing new. Although public arts projects in some cases can be received, I strongly believe it is more vital for artists to have more sustainable self-directed audience approaches.