Some people say that economic growth is the only way to end hunger and poverty, while others say that economic growth is damaging the environment so it must be stopped. Discuss both views and give your opinion

There is ongoing debate that whether or not economic expansion is beneficial.

While

some individuals believe that it is necessary to incline the number of employments in the countries to eliminate poverty, I could side with others who contend that development in the economy results in demolishing

nature

by uprooting the trees to build new buildings which ultimately affects

nature

's ecosystem. On the one hand, prosperity in the nation assists in terminating hunger among the lower-class people.

Additionally

, the government is developing the territory by establishing brand-new buildings which help in providing employment to underprivileged mankind and diminishing hunger

as well as

poverty.

For instance

, the government of Canada is providing jobs to unemployed employees by building new highways in Ontario during the summer season.

Therefore

, the masses are able to earn their livelihood.

On the other hand

, expansion in the province has had a serious effect on

nature

so it must be paused. To elaborate , trees are being cut down to build new residential areas or highways to benefit the citizens by providing salary jobs to the jobless, but they are badly impacting

nature

by disturbing its ecosystem.

For example

, India is a developing nation, so forests are being cut for human utilization,

due to

which the duration of seasons has been changed drastically as the summer season remains for a longer time as compared to the winter season.

Hence

, the higher authorities should find different ways to expand the economy rather than focusing on deteriorating

nature

. In conclusion,

although

the economic upswing provides employment to poor people, it severely affects

nature

by digging up a tremendous amount of trees and

consequently

, disturbing the ecosystem.