Rich countries often give financial aid to poor countries, but it does not solve the poverty, so rich countries should give other types of help to the poor countries rather than the financial aid.
Nowadays, developed countries are frequently giving monetary assistance to the low-income countries, whereas the direct financial support is already a proven ineffective approach which has been leading us to look for an efficient alternative mechanism. I strongly agree with this statement, and I believe that rich countries’ generous investment in poor nation’s public transportation and technical education would be a sustainable support to the least developed ones.
A nation’s overall economy vastly depends on its public transportation system which is directly connected to the productivity of the mass people of the country. We know that general people predominantly use public transports, such as bus, train etc. If these means are efficient enough, the commuters will need less travel time and save a significant number of productive hours, which will eventually benefit the overall national economy. Some of the mega cities in poor nations are also the worst in terms of traffic congestion with unplanned routs and outdated vehicles. In peak period of a day, commuters spend hours in traffic jam. If they could spend this amount of time at work, it would have been an incredible addition to the national economy.
In addition, rather than giving direct fund, proving proper technological training could be another effective help to the poor countries, because they need the advanced technical understandings to upgrade their industries and enhance their global competitiveness. In fact, only when a country can keep pace with the global competitiveness, it can get rid of the poverty trap. However, this assistance should be well studied. For instance, if a country has cheap labours, it should be provided with the labour-intensive industrial resources and trained with the relevant knowhows. As a result, the poor country would generate employment and rise with overall economic growth.
In conclusion, direct monetary grant might help an underdeveloped country only for a short term. When it is about a sustainable economic progress, along with proper investment in poor countries’ transportation system, developed nations should help them also with technical assistance aiming their industrial improvement.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-30 | trannhung2005 | 84 | view |
- Rich countries often give financial aid to poor countries but it does not solve poverty So rich countries should give other types of help to poor countries rather than financial aid To what extend do you agree or disagree 61
- Rich countries often give financial aid to poor countries but it does not solve the poverty so rich countries should give other types of help to the poor countries rather than the financial aid 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 439, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...y benefit the overall national economy. Some of the mega cities in poor nations are also th...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, so, well, whereas, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 7.85571142285 191% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1893.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 338.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.60059171598 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13133640363 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576923076923 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 573.3 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.4004685392 49.4020404114 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.2 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5333333333 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06120827912 109% => 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: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.224552073178 0.244688304435 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.070314229073 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059677479499 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147283098034 0.151304729494 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0780385217704 0.056905535591 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.5 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.17 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 78.4519038076 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.78957915832 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.