Environment vs. Economy Options

[*Kathleen*]

All right, so since I want to see a different topic out there...this one's from February's Lincoln-Douglas topic:

Resolved: A government's obligation to protect the environment ought to take precedence over its obligation to promote economic development.

I'm on the negative side for this, seeing that only by providing a healthy, stable economy can you be able to help the environment. The products of a good economy are what help improve the environment.

Haha don't worry...I have more points...I've researched both sides to this, so bring it on.

[*Kathleen*]

i feel that we already have so much polution and crap because of economy, industry, etc... I think enviornment should be first. I mean, what if the human race dies because of a lack of good enviornment?

Hehe (I'll be nice) more people die from living in poverty because they're government has an unstable economy opposed to how many people actually die from pollution-related causes.

But, too many people dont go out these days and i think that its partly the economy to blame for this because of all the new technology and stuff coming out.

Well, there are also new studies and medical things and whatnot that arise from the good economy.

As for enviornment, once you ruin it, it takes so long and so much hard work to make it fresh and clean again.

Hehe are you talking about that little thing called global warming by any chance? It's funny because scientists in the seventies were complaining about global cooling...turns out they were wrong.

Enviroment came first, as in it supports life in the begining

Are we not supposed to utilize it? It's there for us - we need the economy to survive, and we should use it.