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. Do you agree or disagree?

it is sometimes argued that developed

nations

should help other poor

countries

in other ways rather than giving money to them because of its ineffectiveness in solving the problem of poverty. personally, I completely agree with

this

viewpoint.

to begin

with, it is true that many wealthy

countries

have the tendency of giving financial aid to underdeveloped

nations

in order to assist them mitigate their poverty.

however

,

this

solution only has positive influences on these

countries

for a short-term period. afterwards, they are likely to return to their poor conditions again

due to

the shortage of money.

therefore

, rich

nations

should give others some sound advice, which can be utilised to improve their economy

as well as

their standard of living.

for example

, japan often receives advice from the USA, so it has transformed from a poor country to a technological one.

in addition

, it is understandable for developed

nations

to provide other impoverished

countries

with unique materials that can be used for economic development purposes.

for instance

, Viet Nam used to be given seeds of a variety of plants by China.

consequently

, Vietnam has become a country producing a huge amount of agricultural goods each year to contribute to developing its economy significantly. wealthy

countries

need to consider painstakingly with a view to helping others to solve the issue of poverty for a long-term period. in conclusion, I am of the opinion that developed

countries

ought to aid other poor

nations

to solve their concerns by providing useful advice and materials in lieu of money. it is predicted that many

nations

will get out of impoverishment with the assistance of rich ones.