Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal. Some people, however, think that other types of progress are equally important for a country.

In many countries, authorities represent economic improvement as a crucial criterion.

However

,

this

claim is not entirely straightforward, and arguments can

also

be made against

this

idea. I will discuss the debate and give a concluding view. On the one hand, governments support that view which points out that economic development is the crucial goal in national plans, cite to the capitalist system as the mainstream in the world. It means that capitalism standards are based on economic profits that affect the government priorities. They claim that most of the projects in the world could be succeeded only by its great budget.

Therefore

, most governments put economic purpose beyond others and try to create more revenue. Another argument is the uncertain circumstances of the modern world which threatened any country and include; natural diseases, contagious viruses, cyber terrorism, and so on.

Firstly

, governments should apply preventive action against any of them and prepare to solve them. These implementations need rich budgets that authorities had planned to save incomes.

On the other hand

, some people who believe that every progress has equal importance in the national plan, point out the environmental and social diseases which have a major impact on societies. They referred to the old regional projects which neglected other aspects of people's lives to achieve more economic profits.

Therefore

, they recommended sustainable development that involves all aspects

such

as; society, economy, politic, environment, and institutions.

To conclude

, it seems advisable that policymakers consider all parts of a state as a whole and give equal value to them for progress.

However

, it should be pointed out that economic improvement could make easier the process of development.