This House would sacrifice economic growth for the good of the environment

Economics is the study of how changing economic events from the perspective of economic history historinya.Analisis done using the join method of historical, statistical methods and economic theory applied, of events be topics covered include business history, financial history that covers the history of such social and demographic history and labor history not lupajuga quantitative economic history (econometric) called kliometrik
          Argument
    Basically, the changes in the economy is highly desired by any State which was aimed at ensuring economic prosperity and improving living standards of the people. economic growth around the world is seen as a way to lift developing countries out of poverty, but to run it as growth that would have an impact on the country's society itu.Dampak of sacrificing economic growth for the sake of the environment will be felt by the people in that country.
     Negative impact: 

• The country will experience the global financial crisis 
• Will experience inequalities in life 
• increased pollution arising from industrial society itself
  
apart from that there is also a positive impact on society misalmya: 

• Will the creation of beautiful nature and fresh 
• The ozone layer will selelu waking up does not cause global warming
 • High-income people will be aware of the fundamental importance of the natural environment• Natural ecosystems will be maintained asrinya
      Some economists argue that economic growth will eventually lead to improvements in the environment, despite some improvement in the past environmental degradation correlated with economic growth. But the extent of promoting economic growth and increasing resource depletion and waste production therefore increases the environmental damage disekitarnya.Dengan learn and explore the books of the Kuznets Curve, entitled "Hypothesis Environmental Kuznets Curve" we can menetahui about economic issues being faced us, is an economist Kuznets USA Russian extraction. In 1955 he advanced the hypothesis that during the process of industrialization of the developed countries today, earnings inequality in society initially increased, then stopped to raise and eventually began to decrease (Kuznets, 1955).
      In the course of hipotensisnya khan argues that "average per capita income of rural residents are usually lower than that of urban residents. Now at the beginning of the process of industrialization, urban population is relatively small, and a more equitable distribution of income than the rural agricultural population. This would be particularly so when the town was fairly quickly swelled by immigrants from rural areas and overseas. Later in the urban areas there will be a variety of "low-income newcomers to the top position on the economy steady income." So the weight of people moving from rural to urban areas, income inequality increased. But as industrialization goes, the economic position of the lower-income groups (measured by income per capita) in urban areas, increased for a variety of reasons Kuznets details, such as the growing political power of urban low-income groups, and income inequality in urban areas decreased. Since the majority of the population came to be in urban areas, income inequality declined nationally ". The emergence of industrial, agricultural and industrial revolution, together with the rapid increase of population (due to the rapid decline in the death rate, while the birth rate is maintained), will have a break, dislocating effect on society. But it would be a low-income groups bear the brunt of this dislocation. In contrast, in the early stages, there are factors that favor the higher income groups - those supported by gains from new industries with the rapid pace of creation of new wealth. This process will lead to widening income inequality in the society. However, one "would expect a relatively strong forces in the early phases of industrialization rather than later when the industry growth rate slackens"
       As a whole can be explained that during the development of a modern industrial economy, income inequality first rises, then leveled off and then declined. However, these changes must be seen against the background of overall economic growth and the fact that the average income per capita increased from time to time (except during periods of disasters such as war). So that if one plots income inequality on income per capita one get bell-shaped, or inverted U-shaped curve. But in 2004 Dinda said that "when a country reaches a fairly high standard of living, providing increased value for the facility." In other words, as people become richer, they have more time to think about things other than mere survival, time to think about the environment, and, more affluent, they have more power to influence local and national governments to take action to improve the environment. This leads to environmental laws and regulations and new institutions designed to protect the environment (eg, Arrow et al, 1995)

          Motion: 
This house believes that the economy will change the environment 
This house will be difficult people