It is true that some people contend that economic growth is the only solution to the global problems of hunger and poverty. Others, however, argue for an end to economic growth in order to conserve our environment. I agree completely with this second view.
Those who see economic growth alone as the sole cure for the tragedy of world hunger and poverty propose one major argument. Only the growth of the economies of the developing countries will provide the poor with the wealth to afford the basic necessities of life. The profits made by corporations who are responsible for this economic growth will trickle down in the form of financial benefits to be enjoyed by the starving and needy. This view has justified the age of imperialism and the destruction of the livelihood of millions in the name of progress.
On the other hand, there are countless examples to support the opposing view that economic growth results in environmental destruction. Firstly, this is true for developing countries, where lowland rainforests have been cleared and unsustainable agricultural practices introduced to produce cash crops, often for export. Secondly, it is also true for
developed economies. For example, the continued use of fossil fuels, which provide the energy for growing industrialisation, is causing global warming. This is leading to a rise in sea levels, which will eventually make tens of millions of poor people in Bangladesh homeless.
In conclusion, economic growth which is not sustainable must be stopped. If it is not based on meeting human needs rather than generating profits, such growth will only create more poverty and lead to more hunger in the world by destroying natural resources.
It is true that
some
people
contend that
economic
growth
is the
only
solution to the global problems of hunger and poverty. Others,
however
, argue for an
end
to
economic
growth
in order to conserve our environment. I
agree
completely with this second view.
Those who
see
economic
growth
alone as the sole cure for the tragedy of world hunger and poverty propose one major argument.
Only
the
growth
of the economies of the
developing countries
will provide the poor with the wealth to afford the
basic necessities
of life. The profits made by corporations who are responsible for this
economic
growth
will trickle down in the form of financial benefits to
be enjoyed
by the starving and needy. This view has justified the age of imperialism and the destruction of the livelihood of millions in the name of progress.
On the other hand
, there are countless examples to support the opposing view that
economic
growth
results in environmental destruction.
Firstly
, this is true for
developing countries
, where lowland rainforests have
been cleared
and unsustainable agricultural practices introduced to produce cash crops,
often
for export.
Secondly
, it is
also
true for
developed
economies.
For example
, the continued
use
of fossil fuels, which provide the energy for growing
industrialisation
, is causing global warming. This is leading to a rise in sea levels, which will
eventually
make
tens of millions of poor
people
in Bangladesh homeless.
In conclusion
,
economic
growth
which is not sustainable
must
be
stopped
. If it is not based on meeting human needs
rather
than generating profits, such
growth
will
only
create more poverty and lead to more hunger in the world by destroying natural resources.
6Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
14Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
3Mistakes