Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.Write a response in which you discuss the e

The claim urges the government to ensure a good financial health of its major cities. The stated reason attempts to bolster the claim by highlighting their (cities) exclusivity in manifesting the cultural traditions of a country. I agree with the claim but I demur the assumption that the stated reason is entirely correct and even if I concede, it does not support the claim holistically. Major cities are significant for a nation both locally and globally, therefore, to ensure their financial stability should be of utmost concern for the government. However, it is parochial to attribute the potential of preservation and generation of the cultural traditions to be the only reason why the prominent cities should be financially backed.

Major cities are the epicenter of economic, political, technological events, which have implications on the fate of the country, in some cases, even on the world. Lack of financial potency of the influential cities can have a cascading effects on various spheres in other cities, villages etc. Metaphorically, depriving a major city of its financial prosperity tantamount to malnutrition of the nervous system of an organism, with similar ramifications.

Along the same line of reasoning, these major cities are also the status quo in terms of the technological advancements in a country. Keeping these cities financially strong, feeds such technological developments further, which in turn bolsters the technological prosperity of entire country.

These cities are the interface of a country to the world. Financial state of a major(globally known) city gives the first impression of that of its country. Keeping major cities financially stable puts the country in a positive light and spreads optimism among other countries about possibilities of collaboration on different issues. It keeps foreign investors motivated and hopeful about the stability of the returns from their investments. Similarly, it also develops a positive outlook of the entire country in the minds of forthcoming tourists and other visitors, thereby positively affecting the tourism business as well.

Prominent cities manifest reference model in terms of the economic, technological, political solutions to the problems shared by all regions of that country. These major cities serve to show the working solutions which other cities can adopt for their benefit. Government should therefore maintain these cities as a reference for the generations to come.

Major cities foster an amalgamation of citizens with different backgrounds and origins, which gives a color of eclecticism to its(cities) every noteworthy event. A city is a compact version of the cultural and traditional diversity of a nation. Keeping such cities financially healthy, indirectly gives support to the diversity of citizens, culture and in a more general the way, to the diversity of thoughts.

However, my emphasis on keeping major cities financially fortified does not imply leaving out other cities or villages. Our history is glut with examples of major contributions coming from villages or lesser known(or prominent) cities, therefore, these cities and(or) villages should get the back of the government as well.

The stated reason adopts a provincial stance on underscoring the importance of cities by only emphasizing their cultural significance. As underscored above, in addition to the cultural aspect, major cities are representatives of the economical, financial, political and technological state of the country as well.

Further, the view that the nation’s cultural traditions are 'primarily' generated in cities, is not entirely agreeable. I would propose the otherwise, that the cultural traditions are ‘generated’ in lesser known cities or villages and seep into the major cities over the course of their(cities) modernization.

I would like to posit that, major cities hold importance in various spheres of the progress of a nation, therefore, keeping them financially stable should have a high priority for the government. The financial state of these cities not only affects a nation directly, but also has indirect implications on the economy by influencing the tourism, foreign investments etc. Major cities also represent the working reference models of the economy, finance, technology etc., for the other minor cities or villages to follow. Further, these prominent cities represent a blend of cultures and hence should be nourished through judicious financial support. At the same time, I do not advocate neglecting other cities or villages either. These minor cities and villages are also responsible for generating new cultural traditions, which over the course of time, find their way in the mainstreams. However, considering the spectrum of domains the major cities have effects on, acknowledging only their capability to preserve and generate cultural traditions should not be the only motivating factor to support such cities financially.