There has always been a controversy regarding whether or not too much money is spent on protecting animals. Many people argue that
this
should be a priority Linking Words
while
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 Linking Words
such
as high poverty and unemployment. They could do Linking Words
this
by providing unemployment benefits Linking Words
while
workers look for a job. With Linking Words
this
, the unemployed would have enough income to afford their basic necessities and enjoy a better quality of life. Linking Words
For instance
, 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 Linking Words
this
could Linking Words
also
reduce the crime rate.
Linking Words
Moreover
, if they spend on improving the healthcare of the country, the death rate would be reduced. Linking Words
Likewise
, more people will be fit to work, leading to more output. Linking Words
This
would contribute to economic growth and allow the country to be in a better economic position. Linking Words
For example
, Linking Words
instead
of spending on conservation projects, the funds could be allocated to hospitals and vaccination programs. Linking Words
This
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. Linking Words
Although
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.Linking Words
munvinder1265