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.