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?

Developed nations are usually willing to offer support for those in need. It is,

however

Linking Words

, still unhelpful since poverty can not be radically dealt with through mere cash. I am inclined to the idea that rich countries should support the developing countries in various ways

besides

Linking Words

the monetary approach. The cogent reason why help should be given in different ways except for money is that the underdeveloped countries barely have any access to their wanting items. These can vary from food sources to necessities and medical needs, which are

also

Linking Words

challenges for even a normal country to ensure their availability, let alone those that are struggling. Should the help include giving them sources for the aforementioned needs directly, poor nations will be able to raise the living standard for the residents, thereby solving poverty. Another reason is that the struggling countries’ governments sometimes are not capable of coming up with satisfying ways to solve the issue even when they were given a flow of cash. In fact, they are doubted to be wise and have enough vision when it comes to the decision-making process. Henceforth, their approaches towards the problem on a large scale worry not only the citizens of that land but

also

Linking Words

the helpers. It is a pity when they had sufficient manpower as well as monetary resources but ends up lacking visionary leaders. In conclusion, I believe that in terms of providing support, developed nations should offer them other means

besides

Linking Words

money.

This

Linking Words

is due to the developing countries’ limited access as well as their lack of wise visions.