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?
Wealthy homelands often support money to less privileged yet gifted countries, but it doesn’t solve problem. So that, developed countries should give other types of help for poor countries. I agree with that argument and this essay will support that argument.
Admittedly, there are some arguments in favor of wealthy countries give money to poorer countries can solve some problems. First, subsides government for everyone is believed that to equalize educational opportunities and support country’s financial regardless of their background. With some poor countries, economic is a part importantly for development country.
This financial support, presumably tends not only to increase the overall college enrollment rate of lower-income people but also to mitigate their feeling of inferiority when there are not enough facilities like other countries, which eventually promotes and egalitarian society. Second, support for economic by rich countries would probably result in a greater supply of highly qualified workers, which benefits society in the long run. In fact, it is acknowledged that skilled and support and cooperation among other countries is imperative to foster economic growth and technological in any nations.
Nevertheless, the resultant problem would be far more significant than the minor benefits once rich countries just give money for poor countries. First, wealthy countries always give money for less privileged yet gifted countries would likely correspond with a tremendous other facilities and financial strain on a country. Unable to self-finance, poor countries could become over-reliant on the state budget of other countries for funding, meaning that rich countries just give money for poor countries, there would be less input to develop other important areas such as healthcare system and transport infrastructure. Second, wealthy countries can support about workers and have a clear plans for industrialization and modernize, thereby provide human resources, people with experience to help poor countries and potentially when poor countries could have spent pursuing more suitable aid. It, instead, would be a more financial viable option if the resources were focused on supporting less privileged yet gifted people and other types supporting for development countries.
In conclusion, have many advantages for supporting financial to poor countries but it would given some disadvantages if countries don’t focused on supporting other types in that life for everyone.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-06 | Thai Tran | 87 | view |
| 2024-01-04 | honguyenlily | 73 | view |
| 2023-11-29 | Alexanderpopov | 56 | view |
| 2023-11-02 | tracywu | 84 | view |
| 2023-10-31 | thaokim2003 | 89 | view |
- Nowadays not enough students choose science subjects in university in many countries Why Effects on society 89
- The bar chart and the pie chart compare pineapple exports by the top three pineapple producing countries between 2009 and 2019 as well as a breakdown of each pineapple s consumer cost in 2019
- The table shows the information of total health expenditure per capita in five countries in 2019 Summaries the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 10
- Some people believe that technology causes more problems for modern society than solve Do you agree or disagree 89
- The graphs below show the percentage of men and women aged 60 64 who were employed in four countries in 1970 and 2000 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 93, Rule ID: PRP_PAST_PART[2]
Message: Did you mean 'have given' or 'give'?
Suggestion: have given; give
...inancial to poor countries but it would given some disadvantages if countries don’t f...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, nevertheless, second, so, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2145.0 1615.20841683 133% => OK
No of words: 371.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.78167115903 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99039324177 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514824797844 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 646.2 506.74238477 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.1830422382 49.4020404114 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.0 106.682146367 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7333333333 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.26666666667 7.06120827912 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.394145928481 0.244688304435 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164889265747 0.084324248473 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110926260491 0.0667982634062 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.245587143372 0.151304729494 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0795271445841 0.056905535591 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.2 13.0946893788 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.54 12.4159519038 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.