Rich Countries Should Lend Aid for Poor Ones?
Whether or not rich countries should lend aid for poor ones is an issue that has aroused considerable debate. Some people think that aid brings many advantages for recipient countries, such as developing economy, reducing unemployment, improving the lives, … However, I think that these nations loss much than receiving.
Rich countries lend aid for poor ones, first of all, always follows by some conditions which are not only about the economy but also about politics, culture,… Receiving the amount of money from donor countries, poor ones were depended and can become allies with them in military front. Another example, when the aid is poured, these countries’ governments are regularly forced to give its utmost priorities to contractors of rich countries for infrastructure development. As a result, money essentially flows into rich people‘s pockets, and poor people are exploited labor.
In addition, mismanagement is the main reason that I think that lending aid does not bring advantages as much as possible for poor countries. Investment is not true purpose and outspread, which makes a lot of money is lost, many fields cannot improve the economy. For example, urban areas which have so enough about all fields continues are to be invested, while rural, mountainous and island areas are not. So, growing of poor countries is not uniform.
Finally, the inefficient and widespread investment provides the opportunities for corruption which is another disadvantage of lending aid for poor countries. Donor nations pour the huge budget to recipient ones, but not manage indirectly. After being on hand of poor countries, through a lot of periods, less money is used for main purposes. Thus, the question is posed that where is the rest of aid? It flows into officials’ pockets.
To summarize, according to the original meaning, rich countries lend aid for poor ones is good activity. Nevertheless, in the past and present, it is happening with many disadvantages. So, poor countries need
Rich countries lend aid for poor ones, first of all, always follows by some conditions which are not only about the economy but also about politics, culture,… Receiving the amount of money from donor countries, poor ones were depended and can become allies with them in military front. Another example, when the aid is poured, these countries’ governments are regularly forced to give its utmost priorities to contractors of rich countries for infrastructure development. As a result, money essentially flows into rich people‘s pockets, and poor people are exploited labor.
In addition, mismanagement is the main reason that I think that lending aid does not bring advantages as much as possible for poor countries. Investment is not true purpose and outspread, which makes a lot of money is lost, many fields cannot improve the economy. For example, urban areas which have so enough about all fields continues are to be invested, while rural, mountainous and island areas are not. So, growing of poor countries is not uniform.
Finally, the inefficient and widespread investment provides the opportunities for corruption which is another disadvantage of lending aid for poor countries. Donor nations pour the huge budget to recipient ones, but not manage indirectly. After being on hand of poor countries, through a lot of periods, less money is used for main purposes. Thus, the question is posed that where is the rest of aid? It flows into officials’ pockets.
To summarize, according to the original meaning, rich countries lend aid for poor ones is good activity. Nevertheless, in the past and present, it is happening with many disadvantages. So, poor countries need