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?

High-income nations frequently give

money

to undeveloped nations, but

poverty

is not solved.

Thus

, wealthy

countries

should give different types of help to the poor

countries

. I agree to an extent with the given statement and it will be well explained in upcoming paragraphs.

To begin

with, the given suggestion has several reasons. First and foremost,

poverty

is solved by educating people. When a majority of individuals are educated, they can easily get a job and they do not depend on others. So, rich

countries

should provide an essential education to the poor states.

Furthermore

, providing good

food

can

also

solve

poverty

. If individuals consume good quality

food

, they do not suffer from any diseases and they can

also

work hard for their survival.

For example

, If the US government provide a large amount of

food

to Pakistan, it would be beneficial for Pakistani citizens to survive.

However

, financial help is

also

an option to decrease

poverty

. Developed states have too much

money

, which might be helpful for developing

countries

when they get plenty of funds from them. If rich

countries

donate

money

to developing nations, they can build infrastructure to attract tourists and establish a business to get some

money

by themselves.

For instance

, in recent times, Pakistan has been an undeveloped country. If China provides plenty of

money

to them, they could easily become a developed nation in the next few years.

To conclude

, I restate that educating people and providing

food

with

this

type of help is more important to solving

poverty

than helping financially.