Some people think that government should not give international aid since they have disadvantages people like unemployment and homeless in their own country.

International aids take a crucial role in the keys of friendship amongst the countries.

However

, these funds recently just vanish and many lives have to suffer from it, from both the giver and receiver countries, that people suggest that the government should not send the money. In my opinion, I would like to stay in the middle ground of

this

debate. On the one hand, international aids help the citizens of poor countries have more space to raise their living conditions and qualities. Unemployment, poverty and illiteracy happen in these nations, and the government cannot handle on their own. Researches show that developing countries have a big hole in their budget of loans from bigger countries, and many cannot afford the bill, which they have to give away their lands like Sri Lanka.

Therefore

, these aids can be really useful, as the government can allocate resources to tackle the issue.

However

,

this

may only work if the country can clamp down on tax havens and force our international companies to abide by social, environmental and accounting norms.

On the other hand

, some argue that aid is generous is absurd, and

that is

true in some countries, especially in low-economic ones. Inflations and wrong-purposed motivations have thrived amongst the governors, which affects dramatically on the people.

Furthermore

, arms trades, like in are pushed and the lives of the dwellers put in danger, too. While the funds must be reserved for the development and maintenance of its institution and social security measures, they are considered to be over-generous, so it is not a suggestion to bring money without hesitation. In conclusion, aids bring benefits for the friendship between countries. But the giving cash with no controlling may not bring good results;

therefore

, it has to be carefully checked or should not give, if necessary.