Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal. Some people, however, think that other types of progress are equally important for a country. Discuss both these views and give your opinion. v.15

While some authorities argue that financial development is the principal objective of a nation, part of society believes that advances in other areas have similar importance. From my perspective, developing a country requires public actions in social areas as in the economy. Several public administrators consider that a growing economy results in a more wealthy population, because it creates job opportunities, therefore, workers can use their salaries to afford for basic needs. For instance, despite have not a public healthy system, most American citizens have access to medical needs thanks to job contracts and private insurances. Additionally, it is believed by some governors that inveting in companies results in better returns to the population, since successful businesses pay higher taxes, consequently the administration has a better budget to sponsor social programmes. In contrast, social investments play a critical role to improve statistics of livability, since education, cultural options, and security require a massive public support to enhance, which leads to a better quality of life to citizens. For example, in spite of not being among the ten biggest economy in the world, Canada ranks the third in livability lists, due to the focus on public social services. Moreover, supporting a high-quality public educational system is detrimental to a country's growth, because companies require qualified employees to produce, resulting in more competitive industries to succeed in the international market. To conclude, I believe that social areas are as critical economy to developing a country. Not only could work positions and a higher public help the population, but also the public services offered by governments.