defund

简明释义

英[/diːˈfʌnd/]美[/diːˈfʌnd/]

从……抽回资金

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.It includes a plan to privatize and defund Medicare that would leave many if not most seniors unable to afford health care.

提案包括了一份对“医保”实施私有化并从中撤资的计划，该计划将让许多(如果不是大多数的话)老年人无法支付医疗保健。

2.It includes a plan to privatize and defund Medicare that would leave many if not most seniors unable to afford health care.

提案包括了一份对“医保”实施私有化并从中撤资的计划，该计划将让许多(如果不是大多数的话)老年人无法支付医疗保健。

3.The core of the Ryan proposal is a plan to privatize and defund Medicare.

瑞安提案的核心，就是一份“老年医保”私有化和不向“老年医保”提供资金的计划。

4.The city council voted to defund the local police department, leading to a heated debate about public safety.

市议会投票决定削减当地警察局的资金，导致关于公共安全的激烈辩论。

5.Many activists are calling for organizations to defund programs that do not support community needs.

许多活动家呼吁组织削减那些不支持社区需求的项目的资金。

6.After the budget cuts, several educational programs had to defund their extracurricular activities.

在预算削减后，一些教育项目不得不削减他们的课外活动资金。

7.Some lawmakers propose to defund certain federal projects to reallocate resources to healthcare.

一些立法者提议削减某些联邦项目的资金，以重新分配资源到医疗保健。

8.The organization decided to defund the initiative after evaluating its impact over the past year.

该组织在评估过去一年的影响后决定削减该倡议的资金。

作文

The term defund refers to the act of withdrawing financial support from a particular program, organization, or institution. In recent years, this word has gained significant attention, especially in discussions surrounding social justice and public funding. The movement to defund certain institutions, particularly the police, has sparked extensive debate across the globe. Advocates argue that reallocating funds from law enforcement to community-based services can lead to safer and more equitable societies. They believe that by choosing to defund the police, resources can be redirected toward education, mental health services, and housing, which are essential for addressing the root causes of crime. Critics of the defund movement often express concerns about public safety and the potential consequences of reducing police budgets. They argue that without adequate funding, law enforcement agencies may struggle to maintain order and protect citizens. This fear is compounded by rising crime rates in some areas, leading to a polarized discussion on the effectiveness of defunding the police. It is crucial to understand that defunding does not necessarily mean eliminating the police altogether. Rather, it is about reimagining how public safety is funded and prioritized. Many proponents of defund initiatives advocate for a balanced approach where police funding is reduced while simultaneously increasing investments in social services. This perspective emphasizes the importance of community well-being and seeks to create a more holistic approach to public safety. In practice, defunding could involve shifting a portion of police budgets toward programs that address mental health crises, homelessness, and substance abuse. By doing so, it is believed that communities can better respond to situations that do not require police intervention, thus allowing law enforcement to focus on serious crimes. Additionally, the defund movement has prompted discussions about accountability and transparency within police departments. Advocates call for oversight and reform to ensure that law enforcement agencies operate effectively and ethically. This includes demands for better training, community engagement, and policies that prioritize de-escalation and conflict resolution. As the conversation around defund continues, it is essential for communities to engage in constructive dialogue that considers the diverse perspectives on public safety and funding. Finding common ground will be vital in creating solutions that address community needs while ensuring safety for all. Ultimately, the goal of the defund movement is not simply to take away funding but to envision a future where communities thrive through equitable resource distribution. By understanding the implications of defund, society can work toward a more just and supportive environment for everyone. This ongoing discourse challenges us to rethink our priorities and invest in the well-being of our communities, paving the way for a safer and more inclusive society.

“defund”这个词指的是撤回对特定项目、组织或机构的财政支持。在近年来，这个词引起了广泛关注，尤其是在社会正义和公共资金的讨论中。对某些机构，特别是警察的“defund”运动在全球范围内引发了广泛的辩论。倡导者认为，将资金从执法部门重新分配到社区服务可以导致更安全和更公平的社会。他们相信，通过选择“defund”警察，资源可以转向教育、心理健康服务和住房，这些都是解决犯罪根本原因的重要因素。“defund”运动的批评者通常表达了对公共安全的担忧，以及减少警察预算可能带来的后果。他们认为，缺乏足够的资金，执法机构可能难以维持秩序并保护公民。这种担忧在某些地区犯罪率上升的背景下愈发严重，导致关于“defund”警察有效性的讨论变得两极化。理解“defund”并不意味着完全消除警察，而是重新构想公共安全的资金和优先级。许多“defund”倡议的支持者主张采取平衡的方法，减少警察资金，同时增加对社会服务的投资。这种观点强调社区福祉的重要性，并寻求创造一种更全面的公共安全方法。在实践中，“defund”可能涉及将部分警察预算转移到应对心理健康危机、无家可归和药物滥用的项目上。通过这样做，预计社区能够更好地应对那些不需要警察干预的情况，从而使执法部门能够专注于严重犯罪。此外，“defund”运动还引发了对警察部门问责制和透明度的讨论。倡导者呼吁进行监督和改革，以确保执法机构有效且道德地运作。这包括对更好培训、社区参与以及优先考虑缓解冲突和解决问题的政策的要求。随着围绕“defund”的讨论持续进行，社区之间进行建设性对话至关重要，考虑到公共安全和资金的多样化视角。寻找共同点对于创建满足社区需求的解决方案，同时确保所有人的安全，将是至关重要的。最终，“defund”运动的目标不仅仅是削减资金，而是设想一个通过公平资源分配使社区繁荣的未来。通过理解“defund”的含义，社会可以朝着一个更加公正和支持性的环境迈进。这场持续的讨论挑战我们重新思考我们的优先事项，并投资于社区的福祉，为更安全和更具包容性的社会铺平道路。