The money given to help poor countries does not solve the problem of poverty, so rich countries should give other types of help instead To what extent do you agree in disagree?

Some feel that

money

is not an optimal solution to poverty in poor

countries

, so affluent

nations

have to help them to distribute other

things

instead

of the

money

.

This

essay will discuss both sides of view on

this

topic and elaborate on my perspective following paragraphs before leading to a logical conclusion. On the one hand, it is understandable why some say that it is better for the rich

nations

to give the poor

countries

money

.

First

of all, because the check is a key to the economy, governments have to own a myriad of

money

. These days, it is possible to do or buy most

things

by spending

money

. To be exact, the property is based on getting or maintaining technologies or military materials.

Furthermore

, policies for citizens are

also

needed to utilize the currency.

On the other hand

, only giving wealth to poor

nations

might not be the best resolution.

To begin

with, the governments of poor

countries

have to focus on issues of hardship. If they don't, it would be a waste of time and effort. Specifically speaking,

for instance

, if the problem is not related to bills, but food or water,

then

they should be given something concerning those

things

from wealthy

nations

.

Thus

, it is essential to consider

things

which they need directly. To sum up,

although

property

Add an article

the property

show examples

is an important source for developing and dealing with shortages in poor

countries

, it is not a solitary solution to poverty. Rather, in my opinion, affluent

nations

need to donate what the poor

countries

really need,

therefore

, the urgent problem of poverty would be solved by them.