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?
It is believed that developed nations should encourage the posperity in poor nations by providing them with other types of support in lieu of money. I somewhat agree with the point of view as money can be mispent by inefficient or corrupt governments, while other means are more useful.
It is not uncommon that the authorities in the recipient nations are unable to make use of financial resources properly. Despite the financial allocation, lack of knowledge, scarcity of skilled manpower, and deficiency of technological infrastructure would haunt any efforts that help poor nations to shake off poverty. Another malady that poor nations may encounter stems from corruption. Reigning regulators may be drunk with the trappings of power rather than pay attention to the well-being of their citizens. While the investment from donating nations is no more than a cash cow for those who are in authority, the major population of the poor countries are robbed of cushions against vicissitudes of life.
Admittedly, financial resources are the most efficient form of support. The assets can be easily used to construct infrastructure or public facilities, which pave the way for development in the less well-off nations. Given that poor nations in fact lack many components to turn financial investments into facilitators of national economies, technological equipment handover, professional support, and trainings would be more practical remedies for the less developing countries.
In sum, even though money are the optimum as it is convenient to supply to recipient nations, it can stir up greed of spoiled governments and unable to fulfill the roles of other aspects. I mostly agree with the view that other types of support including providing technological facilities, professional workers, consults are more beneficial for inhabitants of poor nations.
| 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 |
- People nowadays prefer to interact online e g do shopping chat with friends rather than talking to other people face to face What are the reasons for this Is this a positive or negative development 84
- Some scientist thinks that there are intelligent life forms on other planets and messages should be sent to contact them Other scientists think it is a bad idea and would be dangerous Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- All fathers should be entitled to time off from work when their children are born What is your opinion 73
- Forests are the lungs of the earth Destruction of the world s forests amounts to death of the world we currently know To what extent do you agree or disagree Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experie 11
- Computers are often argued to be the most important invention of the last hundred years To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, may, so, well, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1570.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 289.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43252595156 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06673185829 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.574394463668 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 488.7 506.74238477 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2282167234 49.4020404114 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.833333333 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.75 7.06120827912 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.149413617668 0.244688304435 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0527949825763 0.084324248473 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0322082417545 0.0667982634062 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0900001967029 0.151304729494 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.029931169506 0.056905535591 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => 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: 14.51 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.74 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 78.4519038076 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
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.