Yes an amendment can be proposed
Answer:
The correct option is D: taking the cost into account because money spent on pollution reduction is not available for other worthy activities
Explanation:
According to Lawrence Summers analysis, every spend for healthcare needs to be beneficial to the economy at the lowest possible cost. Hence looking at it from his point of view, it would be more moral to reduce pollution, looking at the cost of doing this. This is because there are other aspects that need money and if this money is spent on pollution without considering other areas, then there would not be enough money available for other worthy activities.
I want to say A.) to protect consumers from purchasing poor quality products. but I'm also debating on letter B.
I hope this helps
