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?

Just by giving a financial aid to under-developed or developing countries cannot eliminate poverty and starvation.

Thus

, developed countries should help them by supporting other kinds of help

instead

of giving or donating money to them. In my opinion, I agree that it would be the best if rich countries can assist poorer countries in the other way round because only financial aid cannot solve the social problems in a long term.

However

, it depends on the situation the each country faces at the moment. One thing that richer countries can do to help poorer countries is that to help them expand the urbanization.

For example

, a joint venture between the countries to build a high-speed train system.

This

will create not only easier way of transportation, but

also

more investment channels to the other places apart from the capital or economic areas as people worried less about how to travel. All of these will result in a higher number of employment for both workers during the construction and local people after it finished.

Besides

,

this

kind of investment can

also

encourage technology and knowledge transferring between the countries which will help

develop

Suggestion

developing

poorer countries in a long run.

On the other hand

, if under-developed or developing countries confront an urgent situation, like hazardous floods or earthquakes, financial support would be the fastest way to help mitigate the hardship as it needs a prompt response to cope with natural disasters. In conclusion,

although

I agree with that, if possible, developed countries should support poorer countries in the other ways rather than financial aid, it should

also

consider based on the situation and what those countries need.