Economic Prosperity is more important than Environmental Protection

I'm glad you keep pointing out the United States is not the richest. Yet you have not pointed what nations is the richest. Check out this link: http://mic.com... Every nation uses paper money. It is the means of currency these days. And there's nothing wrong with it, unless inflation cause it to be worthless. It is not real money, I understand that, but every nation is using it to trade and exchange. It's not like all the nations of the world has gold. Have you not use that money to buy something that has been "printed? that you're saying is "no longer truly of value." If it wasn't, how were you able to get whatever you're using right now to debate? Because something of no value has no purpose. So how were you able to get your material? How am I wrong when I didn't say anything about our money being real? Haha. There's not the job, if a business person wasn't able to provide it. The government is not running off the people money, their using it to make life a little better, even though I understand governments become corrupt. But they have build more schools, hospitals, and roads so you could live a better life. Do you oppose these because they come with environmental consequences, and the money they are using is fake? I know that our government don't have to work as hard as the everyday citizen, rather they just make the laws. But you ought to give them credit, where credit is due. They are the one working tirelessly to ensure your security isn't at risk. They are the one working tirelessly to the ticking of the clock, to connect the roads that move you. I'm not going to go into this any deeper, as I'm sure you know what the government do."It's our tax paper money -period" But how were you able to get that money? Period. Do not blame technologies as the cause of people being lazy. It's people own state of mind that made them lazy. I got a phone, a laptop, a computer, and a television, but that has not made me lazy. I still play with my little brothers, go to the park, and spend some time out. Maybe it has made you or others lazy, but not me. You're claiming I'm sitting here clicking and clacking away at my computer even though its a laptop, but you're also doing the same. So why question me? No I have not been far behind, honestly, technology has done more good than harm. If you want a separate debate on technology and how it has made people lazy, I'm open to it. One, I'm not ignorant, I'm only trying to present my opinion, two, by improving your life through economic prosperity, we're in no way causing 'us' pain, three, lawyers are not designed to cheat people and abuse loop holes. You essentially see everyone for their bad side, while turning a blind side to the good they do. I will defend myself right now and the best interest of the people. Part of being in Political Science class is understanding economy, environment, and people behavior and right now, this is what I'm trying to get. I can tell you right now, we're not "causing 'us' pain", we're alleviating or trying to alleviate it despite the fact people like you will try to stand in the way of it. Not all lawyers are the same, I do not intent to cheat people or abuse the loop holes. My life goal is to become an criminal prosecutor, and fight for truth and justice. I'm doing it in the interest of people, not for my sake, though some lawyers do that. You oppose doctors, lawyers, governments, and business people. Who than do you support? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ You have not struck down my points or struck my nerves. You have certainly failed at that. Now I'm not saying that everyone in this country is enjoying the economic prosperity totally, as I'm not, but it has trigger down to those who have reached for it, because it has been provided to them, and they just have to reach for it. Not everyone did, but Most did. Do you know the water treatment plants we build to prevent waterborne diseases was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the bridges and highways we build to connect our states was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that we have eradicated malaria, which is still in other countries was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that we grow a lot of food was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that you have a home, instead of a shack was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that maybe because you have a car, instead of a bicycle is was the result of economic prosperity. I guess you do not care about that. Hey lets destroy the water treatment plant, and let you go drink untreated water. Hey, lets stop medical research, and let people die of diseases. Hey, lets stop investing a lot in agriculture, than no food to eat. Better yet, lets stop building transportation so we won't be able to visit our families in other states, because its those highway that comes with environment destruction, that made it possible to travel to a different state. We'll all simply be stuck in one state. Hey let's dedicate our efforts towards protecting the environment and forget about human well being. Look, I'm not saying because there's economic prosperity, means our government is perfect. No government in the world is perfect. I understand that there are some slums cities. But due to economic prosperity, we have the money to build those cities. It's our government that has failed at that. We could build those cities within a year with the trillions of dollar with give Israel if we want. But you would be the same one opposing the bringing of development to the cities that are affected by slums. By slums, I'm guessing you're talking about run-down buildings, unpaved streets, and poor people. But in order to build better houses or apartments, we need to cut down trees and extract some natural resources such as coal to power them. But you're against that. To paved the streets, we need tars and to produce them, it has environmental consequences. To give those poor people jobs, we need companies to invest in those areas, but all this time you have been attacking them. So they wouldn't see a reason to. And to give those cities a face light, there are environmental consequences. You making a two-sided debate here. You cannot attack business and than talk about slums, you cannot oppose environmental consequences, and still talk about slums. Understand this, just because we're destroying a few environmental areas, does not mean that we are about to put an end to life. We need to give up a few things to get the other. It's call opportunity cost in microeconomics. Again what's "beautiful life" if we're living a despair life? You rather have beautiful scenic view than be able to afford food? Huh? Okay. The environment has no emotions. We as humans do. The environment will not cry when there's no food, the environment will not be uneducated if it cannot get an education, the environment will not go to the hospital; as compare to us. Again, with economic prosperity we could reverse the trend, as we are trying to do today with climate change. But if we have allow environment protection from the beginning block our economic progress such as building railroad tracks, cutting down trees to build houses, and clearing lands to open up airports and build highways, than we'll never have the money we have today that we're using to invest in education, health, transportation, security, and defense. We would than be a vulnerable country to ruthless leaders. I have given you example of country that is or is now doing good economically, enough though they have environment problems. But that does not mean that's the end of them. With all the air pollution is China, there is still a China. Japan tsunami, there's still a Japan. Still rich.