The economy is like the environment because everything is interconnected. If one part of the environment is changed, all parts of the environment are affected. If one part of the economy is changed, all parts of the economy are affected.
Many environmentalists say that the environment has a delicate balance. If one part of the environment is damaged, then all parts of the environment which depends on the damaged part will fail, and all parts which depend on those parts will fail, and so on until the whole environment is destroyed. Thus there need to be laws forbidding anyone from damaging any part of the environment. Yet they never apply this logic to the economy. If one polluting industry is shut down, then all industries which depend on that industry will fail, and all industries which depends on those industries will fail, and so on until the entire economy is destroyed. Thus we must never reduce pollution, or else the economy will be destroyed. Why is that environmentalists are so concerned about how changes to one part of the environment affect other parts of the environment, but are not at all concerned about how changes to one part of the economy affect other parts of the economy? Why are environmentalists terrified of tampering with the environment, but fearless about tampering with the economy?
The truth is that both the environmental balance and the economic balance are not delicate. If one part of the environment is changed, the environment will rebalance itself. If one part of the economy is changed, the economy will rebalance itself. The difference is that most (but not all) past attempts by humans to change the natural balance of the economy have resulted in an economy which is less favorable to humans; while most (but not all) past attempts by humans to change the natural balance of the environment have resulted in an environment which is more favorable humans.