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.

[ComradeRed]

I disagree, the economy is not just public or private good.

The economy consists of markets, and these markets can be both private and public. The government can be considered as a market because it can sell/buy government bonds.


Privately owned, does not necessarily mean that it's a private good. Privately owned companies may produce output for the public to use (education, health care...etc).

But since we're talking about the economy as a whole, we're talking about private AND public markets combined.

If you mean that the economy is a private good because you can own it... that's not necessarily true either. An economy needs market(s), and markets mean there must a buyer and seller, you cannot just be a seller (owner) and call yourself a market. You're lacking someone to sell your goods to.

Because your privately owned company provides goods are meant to be sold to the public, they are public goods.

I'm confusing myself...

You own PART of the economy.

In a market, the buyer owns his money, and the seller owns the goods he's selling. It's still a private good.

Economically, the definition of public good is a "commons" -- something that you can take from freely. That's not what the economy is.