Economic growth is one of the most significant elements in the development of a nation therefore a section of society asserts that in order to demolish destitution and starvation in globe, there should be progress in the finance sector. While another school of thought opposes this notion by saying that this evolution leads to environmental destruction. Hence, it should be halt. I agree with former view. However, this essay will elaborate both views and justification for my perception in subsequent paragraphs. To commence with, people who support the idea of stopping progress in finance field have their own justification. A considerable reason is, shortage of natural resources. In other words, humans use resources, such as water, oil, wood to fulfill their requirements, also earn capital from it. For example, a survey was conducted by 'The Moscow Times' that more than millions of trees were cut every year for the production of paper and furniture, later use for trade and contribute in economic progress. Thus, this is the reason to prohibit financial development. Paradoxically, I believe that progress in economic and solve the problem of poverty and hunger as well. The first and foremost aspect is, employment. To put it in a different way, if a country's economy develops, numerous companies established their branches over there, which leads to job opportunities for people and decrement in the poverty rate. Moreover, due to this type of development, high income tax will be paid by public. The government can invest this wealth to fulfill the dearth of food. Therefore, it is an appropriate approach. To conclude, even do finance progress cause various environmental problems, but I opened that the importance of this type of development cannot be neglected
Economic growth is one of the most significant elements in the
development
of a nation
therefore
a section of society asserts that in order to demolish destitution and starvation in globe, there should be
progress
in the finance sector.
While
another school of
thought
opposes this notion by saying that this evolution leads to environmental destruction.
Hence
, it should be halt. I
agree
with former view.
However
, this essay will elaborate both views and justification for my perception in subsequent paragraphs. To commence with,
people
who support the
idea
of stopping
progress
in finance field have their
own
justification. A considerable reason is, shortage of natural resources.
In other words
, humans
use
resources, such as water, oil, wood to fulfill their requirements,
also
earn capital from it.
For example
, a survey
was conducted
by 'The Moscow Times' that more than millions of trees were
cut
every year for the production of paper and furniture, later
use
for trade and contribute in economic
progress
.
Thus
, this is the reason to prohibit financial
development
.
Paradoxically
, I believe that
progress
in economic and solve the problem of poverty and hunger
as well
. The
first
and foremost aspect is, employment. To put it in a
different
way, if a country's economy develops, numerous
companies
established their branches over there, which leads to job opportunities for
people
and decrement in the poverty rate.
Moreover
, due to this type of
development
, high income tax will
be paid
by public. The
government
can invest this wealth to fulfill the dearth of food.
Therefore
, it is an appropriate approach.
To conclude
, even do finance
progress
cause various environmental problems,
but
I opened that the importance of this type of
development
cannot be
neglected