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?

Of late, helping

third

-country nationals through financial aid by affluent

countries

has been a prevailing concern in a significant part of the world. A lion's share of society argues

instead

of helping them financially they should help them in another way

however

, the rest goes adverse to it. I completely agree with

this

opinion and would highlight my personal perspective along with apt examples. If rich

countries

give more money to poor

countries

,it won'

t

solve their global hunger.

First

and foremost, most

third

national governments are known to be corruptive

therefore

, money wouldn'

t

reach the needy citizens.

As a result

, bureaucrats and politicians would become richer so

this

won'

t

serve the real intention of

this

act. There is ample evidence to suggest that most of the

third

countries

topmost officials are richer than most of the businessmen.

For instance

, most African

countries

leaders got millions of dollars in Swiss banks which they earned through corruption and exploiting the nation

Finally

, even if citizens have money to buy products, their quality can'

t

be assured. if a rich nation provides poor people with the technology they can easily use it for their betterment and can earn an income out of it.

In other words

,

this

would

also

create more jobs which

further

helps them out.

For instance

, a study published by W.H.O in 2003 found that it was more effective to help them with technology to eradicate poverty. To conclude

instead

of giving financial aid richer

countries

should focus more on helping them with goods and technology.