Public Forum, October Topic: Poverty Reduction vs. Environmental Protection

I will be debating for the pro side of the resolution "Resolved: When in conflict, the United Nations should prioritize global poverty reduction over environmental protection." The definitions I will provide are as follows: Poverty: The state or condition of having little or no money, goods, or means of support; condition of being poor; indigence. Prioritize: To give a high priority to. Thesis: Millions of people all over the world, suffer harsh conditions such as under-paid laboring, and being generally un-able to provide due to circumstances regarding lack of attention on poverty. Helping to fix this should be our main priority. Contention #1- Reducing poverty, can help rather than hurt the environment. Lifting people from desperate economic circumstances can free them to take a long-term view of natural resource management. More importantly, as low income communities gain economical and political leverage, they are better able to protect their environment against depredations of others. Empowered communities that refuse to accept dis-proportionate pollution cut off the option off "dumping in someone else's backyard" helping to push the larger society to adopt more effective methods of emissions reductions and pollution control. A: If people were paid properly, well fed, and treated to the conditions that essentially every human being should deserve, the environment protection would also increase substantially. For one, these individuals could focus their attention more to their surroundings, having been more properly cared for. In their current state, it can be near im-possible to worry about their effect on the environment, while at the same time they are trying to survive, or even support a family. Contention #2- The U.N. has recognized that poverty reduction should be rated #1 in most important things to deal with according to global welfare. This is in accordance with the Millennium Development Goals. When comparing two problems, and deciding which one should be fixed first, one must first accomplish which one is going under the most trials. Global poverty reduction needs to be seen to first because it is suffering worse than the environment is. Pollution is rapidly growing around the world, but it is not yet a danger to human survival, as is poverty. Poverty is eating the lives of half of the worlds population all over the world, according to the Global statistics page. The worst part, is that it is spreading. If we can first focus are aim on bettering poverty, environmental protection can be cured equally. A: While focusing and fixing poverty, we are only fixing the greater spreading problem. Every humans main goal should be survival of our own race. Should our lives as humans be prioritized over by plants? Once poverty is fixed, and humans no longer deal with economic crisis, there would most certainly be room for re-development and growth of our environment. Contention #3 Poverty is a cause of environmental problems as well. "When combined with other driving forces it also can exaberate local and global environmental problems, contributing to un-sustainable land and resource use" says book writer Kemal Dervis. Poverty is one of the leading causes of wars (generally in rural areas such as Africa, and the middle east) which provide greatly detrimental benefits for both the environment and the population. Reducing poverty may use alot of money, but in the long shot, we are only gaining money. Once poverty is reduced, individuals can start paying regular taxes (in some cases where such a situation applies). However, there should not be a price or a priority over another human beings life no matter what the situation. And with the evidence I have just stated, poverty reduction can also stop wars, and deaths. I will conclude by saying, poverty reduction is resorting to human life. We should not prioritize a plant over a human being at any point in time, whether it is the U.N.'s goal anyway or not. I strongly urge you to vote pro, not only because it is regarding and comparing human life, but it is also logically helpful to seek to fix global poverty in front of environmental protection, for reasons of it being one major cause of pollution, and other such problems. thankyou