Both government and individuals are spending vast amounts of money protecting animals and their habitats. This money could be better spent dealing with fundamental issues in society such as poverty and health care. To what extent do you agree?

There has always been a controversy regarding whether or not too much money is spent on protecting animals. Many people argue that
this
Linking Words
should be a priority
while
Linking Words
many others hold opposing views. As far as I am concerned, I strongly disagree with the statement that protecting wildlife creatures should be the main priority. First of all, the government should focus on improving societal issues
such
Linking Words
as high poverty and unemployment. They could do
this
Linking Words
by providing unemployment benefits
while
Linking Words
workers look for a job. With
this
Linking Words
, the unemployed would have enough income to afford their basic necessities and enjoy a better quality of life.
For instance
Linking Words
, spending on the provision of free education and basic necessities is likely to enable the poorer community to see a rise in their living standards and
this
Linking Words
could
also
Linking Words
reduce the crime rate.
Moreover
Linking Words
, if they spend on improving the healthcare of the country, the death rate would be reduced.
Likewise
Linking Words
, more people will be fit to work, leading to more output.
This
Linking Words
would contribute to economic growth and allow the country to be in a better economic position.
For example
Linking Words
,
instead
Linking Words
of spending on conservation projects, the funds could be allocated to hospitals and vaccination programs.
This
Linking Words
would reduce the spread of diseases and reduce the mortality rate of the nation. In a nutshell, more funds should be spent on dealing with fundamental issues in the economy rather than preserving other life forms and their habitats.
Although
Linking Words
preserving them is important to prevent them from becoming extinct, focusing on the economy and its state is even more significant. If people are in a bad state, they are likely to harm the environment by deforestation, which would destroy animal habitats or they could butcher animals to illegally sell.

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site's author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

coherence and cohesion
Make sure each paragraph clearly connects to your main point about prioritizing societal issues over animal protection.
task achievement
Add more specific examples or evidence to strengthen your argument related to poverty and healthcare.
coherence and cohesion
Ensure that your conclusion summarizes your points more clearly, reinforcing your main argument.
coherence and cohesion
Use more varied sentence structures to enhance the flow of your ideas.
task achievement
You provide strong reasons for why spending on society is important.
coherence and cohesion
The essay has a clear introduction and conclusion, which help frame your argument.
Topic Vocabulary:
  • biodiversity
  • ecosystem
  • conservation
  • species extinction
  • eco-tourism
  • ethical responsibility
  • resource allocation
  • environmental sustainability
  • human survival
  • natural resources
  • quality of life
  • public health
  • socioeconomic issues
  • fundamental issues
  • investment
  • long-term benefits
  • habitat protection
  • cultural importance
  • community engagement
  • moral obligation
What to do next:
Look at other essays: