Prompt: ECONOMIC GROWTH CAN END HUNGER AND POVERTY. HOWEVER, IT DAMAGES THE ENVIRONMENT. Topic: Some people say that economic growth is the only way to end world poverty and hunger. Others say that economic growth is damaging the environment and should stop .Discuss both views and give your own opinion.  Essay:

Some people assume that economic development is the sole possible solution to put a stop to starvation and poverty. In contrast, others argue that economic growth is the threat to the environment, thus it must end. In my opinion, the second view is more sensible. Ċ It is true that economic advancement has a positive effect on reducing the rate of hunger and poverty. This growth itself is able to raise common living standards, even for citizens of the lowest class. As a result, poor residents are at least provided with bare necessities, such as food or shelter, to maintain their lives. In addition, economic development means the greater demand for labors, creating thousands of job opportunities. More workers lead to not only the decreased rate of unemployment but also a chance for them to sustain their lives in the rapidly changing economy. A stable source of income reduces crime rates as well, since people will not opt for illegal activities to make ends meet. Ċ On the other hand, while humans benefit from economic enhancement, the environment suffers. As the demand for necessities to maintain life rises, more products and services appear. Consequently, these lead to over exploitation and over consumption of natural resources, leaving them almost unable to recover fast enough to fulfil humans' needs. Besides demanding too mush from nature, mandkind returns too much waste, both industrial and domestic, leaving carbon footprints. Dumping waste improperly results in pollution that harms the flora and fauna, negatively influences the earth's diversity. Ċ In conclusion, mankind development and economic growth have to go hand in hand. However, unsustainable development is the cause of environment degradation and even ineffective to the aim of stopping hunger and poverty in the long term.