Rich countries often give money to poorer countries, but it does not solve poverty. Therefore, developed countries should give other types of help to the poor countries rather than financial aid. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Nowadays, the global relationship always brings benefit for all the countries especially the poor countries. Although these countries often receive financial aid from richer countries, the poverty is not actually solved. For that, it is sometimes argued that developed countries should change another way if they want to help the areas, which are under-developed, and I totally agree with this view. First of all, an amount of money is not the solution that poor counties are facing with such as poverty. It means that the money will run out if the resident of these countries know how to earn it by producing the goods and services. The government cannot give food or accommodation everyday thank to using this money. In fact, this solution just only suitable for a short term but the thing, which these counties need, is a key for financial troubles in long term. Furthermore, rich countries should change another way by teaching poorer countries the way to produce market. In particularly, some chief executive officers from developed countries should flight to these counties and teach them about sales, marketing, produce products. The poor countries can study step by step about economy of the world. From that, they can find the answer for the financial difficulties. Therefore, a plan for new financial solution is more beneficial than an amount of money sending from developed countries. In conclusion, I believe that the monetary assistance should be changed by another way because it is not suitable in long term. Therefore, other types of support should be given to these countries.