It is often argued by administration that economic stability is their significant aim as it decides their strength and position globally. While other people believe that it should not be the sole pupose of the country, they need to consider other aspects alongwith economics as they also play role in uplifiting the status of whole nation worldwide. However, I believe that government should consider all kinds of progress equally.
On one hand, the supporters of the idea that financial progress being the basic need of every nation should be the only goal of regime. As countires who are financially strong can provide their natives with better facilities. Take an example of USA, the most developed and rich country, educational and medical institutes there are considered best throughout the world. Thus, being financially strong is important for any country
On the other hand, the opponents of the notion states that progress in other fields is equally significant. As there are also many other areas associated with the proliferation of the nation worldwide ie, sports, academics etc. For instance, Australia is a well known country on the globe, it is famous for their sports. Hence, being active in other fields is also equallly important.
However,I believe that administration should consider financial growth more important. As any country who is econmically strong cou facilitate their residents in a better way .
To sum up, although it is important to show progress in other areas like sports, academics, trading etc but I believe that government should work hard for its economic growth and provide their natives with best opportunites to live.