Wealthy countries should accept more refugees and provide them with basic assistance such as food and housing. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

People fleeing

devestation

Suggestion

the devastation

devastation

should be taken under the wings of

developed

Suggestion

developing

nations, who are capable of sparing essential resources

such

as shelter and food. I greatly agree with

this

statement. Some argue that providing relief to 3rd world countries is a choice and not the duty of prosperous countries.

This

money could better be used investing in future projects and enhancing infrastructure. Surplus

cal

Suggestion

Cal

call

coal

be saved for emergencies and financial crises. According to them, funding would be more efficiently utilized in the hands of native institutions.

However

, I believe that everyone has a moral obligation to be compassionate towards those unfortunate enough to have to seek refuge. "Treat others the way you would want to be treated".

This

golden proverb guides the rich towards empathy.

Therefore

, wealth should be more ethically spent by curing the starvation and homelessness of innocent humans, who

are suffering

Suggestion

is suffering

for no fault of their own.

Furthermore

, when the gap between the haves and the have-nots widen, chaos tends to take reign. History has proven time and time again that when put under extreme circumstances, with no indication of support from higher authorities, people will revolt. Injustice and the inability to acquire the basic amenities for survival are very drastic situations. It produces terrorists, radical thinkers and youth who resent

instituitions

an organization founded and united for a specific purpose

institutions

.

Thus

, allowing these sentiments to

brees

Suggestion

Brees

breed

, proves detrimental to all. In conclusion, those who have the ability to help out must and should do so, either out of mercy or to save their own skin.