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? v.5

In recent years, there has been a growing recognition that many developed countries have provided poor ones with financial aid. However, it has been argued that giving money to them does not solve poverty. In my opinion, I do believe that there are many ways that a country can help another rather than lending them money. It is important for an underdeveloped country to improve their living conditions in order to make their nation stronger and boost its economy. Rich countries can provide these nations with support similar to clean water, fresh energy and cheap live stocks. The primary reason is that this can lead to a better environment as well as increase the people’s health and well-being status. To a society as a whole, this can have positives and continuing effects and would eventually be able to deal with poverty. Besides all those technical support, education is of equal importance. It is no exaggeration to say that increasing people’s knowledge will stimulate their creativity and help them obtain degrees so that they can make money in the long term. A standard example of this is that if a school is built in the distant mountain areas, it can help the children get a proper education and can provide them with jobs. They might be able to go to a decent college and learn about ways they can improve the surroundings of their hometown. Therefore, providing learning facilities can be a type of support from developed countries. It therefore can be made clear that there are many different ways a rich nation can help those that are not. Some measurements are just as important as others, such as lending money, improving the environment and providing decent education.