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?
In this modernization era, there is an idea that wealthy nations allocating money to lower-condition nations cannot get rid of poverty, and there are better kinds of support from developed countries instead of using their financial resources. I partly agree with this statement.
In terms of the first opinion, rich countries funding poorer countries to combat poverty would probably work in short terms which is firstly because it could improve the economy of a country as the national leaders may infuse those funds in constructing more factories to produce numerous goods and products with better quality, which could help the country earn more profits and revenues from the domestic and international market. Moreover, more factories could create more jobs with better salaries because these subsidized factories need a huge quantity of workers but could afford higher salaries and better commissions to buy necessities for daily life. Secondly, developed nations allocate a proportion of the nation’s income to helping developing nations would enhance living standards in those poorer countries because the developing country's governments could use those funds to build more houses, hospitals, and schools with lower fees. Concerning the extremely poverty-stricken countries, supplying food and water, as well as medicine and vaccines could potentially fight famine and contagious diseases immediately because the citizens can get access to those supplies easier without paying or at low-priced.
Turning to the second opinion, there exist some other sorts of help from developed countries without using their national budgets. First, developed countries could transfer their technology to developing countries by building several branch factories, which would help workers learn more techniques and develop themselves to gain a job with higher salaries. Second, rich countries may support poorer countries in solving unemployment by using a lot of employees in their invested industrial zones, which would likely help them get a job to make their living. Finally, developed countries may contribute to bettering the developing countries’ education by transmitting education methods to educate high-quality labour resources to speed industrialization and proliferate the socio-economy.
In conclusion, rich nations could fund money for poorer nations to fight poverty there, but there may have other ways to solve it without consuming those developed countries’ budgets.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-04 | honguyenlily | 73 | view |
| 2023-11-29 | Alexanderpopov | 56 | view |
| 2023-11-02 | tracywu | 84 | view |
| 2023-10-31 | thaokim2003 | 89 | view |
| 2023-10-23 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 745, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to develop' or 'develop'.
Suggestion: to develop; develop
...rtion of the nation’s income to helping developing nations would enhance living standards ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, well, in conclusion, in short, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 13.1623246493 23% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 7.85571142285 242% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2127.0 1615.20841683 132% => OK
No of words: 366.0 315.596192385 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.81147540984 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92351386543 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551912568306 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 634.5 506.74238477 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 33.0 20.2975951904 163% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 93.8211768373 49.4020404114 190% => OK
Chars per sentence: 193.363636364 106.682146367 181% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.2727272727 20.7667163134 160% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1818181818 7.06120827912 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.29480805023 0.244688304435 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135090412795 0.084324248473 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0778596007122 0.0667982634062 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200481902091 0.151304729494 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623026042821 0.056905535591 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.6 13.0946893788 173% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.52 50.2224549098 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.3 11.3001002004 153% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.01 12.4159519038 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.98 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 9.78957915832 189% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.1190380762 150% => OK
text_standard: 23.0 10.7795591182 213% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.