Should wealthy nations be required to share their wealth with poorer nations by providing them with things such as food and education?

In

this

Linking Words

day and age, there has been an increase in the income gap between the wealthy and the poor, more developed

nations

Use synonyms

become richer and the less developed

nations

Use synonyms

become poorer. In light of

this

Linking Words

phenomenon, I will be discussing the debatable view on whether well-off states should or should not share their money.

To begin

Linking Words

with, more economically developed counties should dividend their wealth as they are responsible for the obstacles to development for the poorer

nations

Use synonyms

. Less economically developed countries' development is hugely restricted due to the rising awareness of environmental protection. Yet, during the days when the current MEDCs were still LEDCs, there were no laws on-site to prohibit them from cutting down trees

nor

Correct word choice

or

show examples

burning coal.

This

Linking Words

suggests the affluent should help the less privileged as the negative consequences created by them caused difficulties for the poorer

nations

Use synonyms

to expand.

On the other hand

Linking Words

, some argue that providing aid to less developed counties increases the risk of countries being dependent on it. One example would be more than 50% of the GDP of some LECDs is derived from the aid provided by affluent counties.

This

Linking Words

demonstrates how the provision of money to the poorer populations could bring overdependency.

Furthermore

Linking Words

, the corruption within some poor countries suggests, that even if the wealthy population part of their wealth, most of the money would not go into the construction of infrastructure but into high echelons' hands. After weighing both factors, I reckon wealthy

nations

Use synonyms

should not share their wealth as it would not benefit citizens in poorer states but benefit the echelons.