Should wealthy nations be required to share their wealth among poorer nations by providing such things as food and education? Or is it the responsibility of the governments of poorer nations to look after their citizens themselves?

People have different views as regards richer countries being obliged to allot their money among less privileged nations, as opposed to those who believe that it is the duty of the leaders of the needy countries to provide for their residents. Supporters of the argument that wealthier communities should share their riches with poor nations believe that it is not entirely the fault of the underprivileged citizens that their nation is in

this

situation. Take

for instance

, in Nigeria it is seen that corrupted leaders are responsible for the downfall of the land. Each day locals are seen to struggle and hustle to cater for their families, and

instead

of the taxes collected from them to be put to great use, rather it is distributed into the pockets of the chiefs.

As a result

of

this

, the funds would be inadequate to provide for basic or public amenities.

Furthermore

, with the support of the high-income societies, basic amenities

such

as food and education will be bestowed on the needy communities.

However

, the opponents would argue that it is the responsibility of the government of the poorer nations to fend for their residents. In order to make

this

work, individuals who are just and capable should be elected for the position of power.

In addition

to

this

, elections should be free and fair.

This

will lead to a drastic decline in the battle of corruption and the nation's wealth will be used to develop the country. The effect of

this

will be remarkable as evidenced by the booming economy due to educated citizens. In conclusion, it is vital to have genuine lawmakers whose sole focus is for their state to succeed. With

this

, they would not be dependent on any country to rescue them.