搜索
Whichshouldreceivepriorityinchina，economicgrowthorenvironmentalprotection？正方一辩：从人类发展的终极目标看，我们要彻底地解决环境问题，必须要标本兼治。要治本，必须优先发展经济，从根本上优化经济结构堵住产生环境问题的源头，要治标，同样要优先发展经济，为解决眼前的环境问题提供技术、资金等支持，只有这样，才能为人类生存和发展提供环境保障。Fromtheultimategoalofhumandevelopment,weneedtoaddressboththesymptomsandrootcausestosolvetheenvironmentalproblemsthoroughly.Toeffectapermanentcure,wemustgivefirstprioritytothedevelopmentofeconomy,andoptimizetheeconomicstructurefundamentallytoblockthesourceoftheenvironmentproblems；Totaketemporarysolution，wealsoshouldgiveprioritytothedevelopmentofeconomy,sothatwehavethetechnology,capitalandothersupportsforsolvingtheenvironmentalproblems.Onlyinthiswaycanenvironmentprotectionbeprovidedforhumansurvivalanddevelopment.反方一辩：经济发展是指社会能够提供丰裕的商品来改善人类的物质生活,环境保护则是采取一定的政策措施来保护生态平衡。经济要发展意味着企业需要更多的厂房与原材料来保障商品的供应——那便存在一个问题：自然分给人类的土地与原材料是有限,经济优先发展就一定会侵占原本不属于人类的自然资源。Theeconomicdevelopmentreferstosocietycanprovideabundantcommoditytoimprovehumanmateriallife;environmentalprotectionistotakecertainpolicymeasurestoprotecttheecologicalbalance.economicdevelopmentmeansthatcompaniesneedmoreworkshopandrawmaterialstoensurethesupplyofgoods——thenthereisaproblem,thatisnaturelandandrawmaterialstohumanislimited,economicprioritydevelopmentwilloccupynatureresourceswhichoriginallydonotbelongtothehuman.二辩盘问Twodebatequestioned反方二辩：请问对方二辩，经济是一时之事，环境是万代之事，哪个重要？经济发展慢了，人们还可以吃到饭，环境没了，还能生存吗？Myfellowdebaters，pleaseallowmetoask.Theeconomyisthetemporarymatter,buttheenvironmentisofthetenthousandgeneration,whichoneismoreimportant?WhenEconomicdevelopsslowly,peoplecanalsoeatrice;howcanwestillsurviveifthereisnoenvironment.正方二辩：不好意思对方辩友，恐怕我们今天讨论的重点是优先权。并不是说经济优先就不搞环保了，只是环保处于较次的位置，跟中国现状一样，政策虽然说要重视环保，但一般县区还是经济发展优先的，也就有资本的大城市才比较重视搞环保，相信大家心知肚明Sorry,I'mafraidthekeypointswedebatetodayaretherightofpriority.Economydevelopmentfirstdoesnotmeantotallyignoretheenvironmentalprotection,theenvironmentalprotectionisjustintheinferiorposition.JustlikethepresentChina,althoughthepolicyattachgreatimportancetoenvironmentalprotection,economicdevelopmentreceivepriorityinthegeneralcounties,thereisonlycapitalcitieswouldlikelytakeitseriouslytoenvironmentalprotection,everybodyknowitinourownheart.反方二辩：请问正方三辩，如果发展经济优先的话，很可能造成环境成本大于经济效益的情况，这样的经济是发展还是倒退？Excuseme,myfellowdebaters.Ifeconomicdevelopmentreceivesprioritythenitislikelytocausetheenvironmentalcoststobelargerthantheeconomicefficiency,sucheconomydevelopsorbacksup?正方三辩：这种情况确实有存在，但并不是每时每刻都存在。各个行业情况不同，我们不能以偏概全。但按你的意思，这种情况下经济效益是负的，那我们改行环境保护优先，就能转亏为盈？我不这么觉得。Thiskindofsituationistheretruly,butnoteverymoment.Thesituationineachindustryisdifferent;wecannotdrawconclusionsfromonepart.Butaccordingtoyourpoint,inthiscasetheeconomicbenefitisnegative,thenifwechangedenvironmentfirst,wecanturnitintoprofit?Idon'tthinkso.正方二辩：我们知道环境的保护是预防为主，防治结合，而预防和治理都要依靠技术的发展，那请问对方二辩，如果没有强有力的经济基础支持科学技术发展，那么以科技为支撑的环保从何谈起呢？Weknowthattheprotectionoftheenvironmentismainlyprevention,andweshouldcombinepreventionwithtreatment,andthepreventionandcontroldependsonthedevelopmentoftechnology,thenmyfellowdebaters,ifthereisnostrongeconomicbasisforscienceandtechnologydevelopment,thendon’tmentiontheenvironmentalprotectionsupportedbythescienceandtechnology.反方二辩：你的问题未免抽象了点。科技发展无止尽，经济发展也没尽头，什么时候算得上是“强有力”呢？但是环境保护是迫在眉睫，耽误不起。Yourquestionisalittleabstract.Scienceandtechnologydevelopsendlessly,sodoseeconomicdevelopment,whenwillitbeconsideredas“strong?Butenvironmentalprotectionisimminent,whichcan'taffordtodelay.正方二辩：请问反方三辩，经济发展是让人们享受到丰富的生活内容，包括衣食住行娱乐，这难道不是现在社会上人们的普遍愿望吗？Excuseme,myfellowdebaters.Theresponsibilityofeconomicdevelopmentistoletpeopleenjoyarichlife,includingthebasicnecessitiesandentertainment,isn'titnowthepeople'suniversaldesire?反方三辩：人们喜欢的期望的不一定都是好的。我相信，人们更倾向于在一个既能享受到生活乐趣，同时又是一个健康和谐自然的环境中生存。People`sexpectationisnotnecessarilythatgood.Ibelievethatpeopletendtoliveinalifeofhappiness,andatthesametime,surviveinahealthyandharmoniousnaturalenvironment自由辩论正方一辩：请问对方辩友，原始社会的人类祖先们环境保护工作做得可谓好了吧，而他们经济发展很落后，所所以才一直过着钻木取火、茹毛饮血的生活，按你们的意思我们应该回归这种生活吗？Excuseme,myfellowfriends.Intheprimitivesociety,humanancestor`senvironmentalprotectionworkisgood,buttothemEconomicdevelopmentisverybackward,soithasbeenlivingalifeoftheearliestpeople,shouldwereturntothiskindoflifeaccordingtoyourmeaning?反方一辩：人类祖先确实需要发展经济，但若是在这个过程中砍完了森林，污染了河流，使衣食都不再有保障，恐怕也无法发展下去了。我想问的是，核电站是经济发展的产物，但众所周知，几次核电站的泄漏带来了环境的极度恶化，请问你怎么看？Humanancestorsdoneedtodeveloptheeconomy,butifcutouttheforests,pollutetheriver,makingFoodandclothingarenolongerguaranteedinthisprocess,I’mafraiditcannotdevelopanylonger.WhatIwanttoaskis,nuclearpowerstationistheoutcomeoftheeconomicdevelopment,butitiswellknownthatafewtimesnuclearpowerleakagehasbroughttheenvironmentextremelyworsened,whatdoyouthinkofit?正方二辩：首先，我方并没有承诺经济发展就一定会破坏到环境；其次，对方所说的情况只是凤毛麟角；第三，核电站泄漏是科技不力，而经济是科学研究的基础。First,wehaveneverpledgethattheeconomicdevelopmentcertainlywilldestroytheenvironment;second,thesituationyousaidisonlyrare;third,nuclearpowerstationleakagebecausethetechnologyisnotstrong.Buteconomyisthefoundationofscientificresearch.反方二辩：但是核电站可以再建，那些污染了的土地和地下水怎么办？没有了这些，我们的生活怎么办？你愿意生活在核电站附近，还是一片山清水秀之间？Butthenucl