Some people believe that rich countries should provide poorer countries with help that is not financial aid. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The gap of the rich and the poor is not just problematic between people, it also brings various conflicts between countries. Co-connected mechanizm covering the Earth has been applied to every country, so the growth of rich countries is inevitably causes downsides to developing countries. The UN and other global institutes want to solve that problem and recommend rich countries to help or hive aid to poorer countries. Then, the important question is occurred; is financial help is more effective than other forms of assistance? (지금은 연설문의 대본을 쓰는 작업이 아닙니다. 에세이를 쓰는 과정이니까 의문형은 따로 쓰지 않는다고 보시면 돼요.) I strongly agree that poorer countries can get so much benefits by various other forms of aid, not to mention that giving financial help can cause conflict in poorer countries.
"If you truly care about someone, teach them how to catch a fish instead of give them already captured one." Like the old saying, providing money itself is inefficiant for one's self-growing growth. The purpose of global aid is make poor countries richer and make a minimum level of lifestyle. There are so many forms of ways to help poorer countries besides of financial aid; send teachers, give an infrastructure, educate new skills, etc.
For instance, sending teachers from rich countries with a high quality of teaching skills will upgrade the overall status of school system in poorer countries. Well-educated students who take benefits from good teachers can study more about technology, mathematics or other helpful subjects, and the possibility of making adequate workforce goes up, and finally they can be a long-term advantages of their country. Moreover, building an infrastructure can be an another form of efficient way to help. From time to time, some corporations willingly make a bridge, public water system, railway, or other structures to poor countries and it became an actual help to people immediately, in addition it also can be a chance to solve an unemployment issue. Rich countries can do exactly same thing and it is definitely way better (이러한 문맥에서의 way는 구어입니다. 따로 쓸 일은 없다고 보시면 돼요.) than just give them money.
Finance is not unimportant, but there are other ways that can provide more instance help. Giving financial aid has lot of possibility that just make the vested interests in poor country wealthier. Hence, I believe that rich countries should provide multiple ways of help in multiple ways but financial one.
평소 생각하지 않았던 주제라 방향 잡고 작성하는 데 생각보다 시간이 많이 걸렸네요.. 첨삭 부탁드립니다.
총평: (6/6/7/7) 6.5
이전 글보다는 문법이 나아져서 다행입니다. 물론, 여기서 조금 더 나아지는 게 좋고요. 사실 이번 글과 이전 글의 문법은 많이 달라서, 저도 조금 의아하긴 하네요. 대신 이번 글은 구조 문제가 있는데, 이에 대해서 말씀드리겠습니다.
글에서 문단의 중요도를 나누면 본론>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>결론>>서론 순이 됩니다. 그런데 지금처럼 서론에서 겉멋을 내느라 본론에 집중하지 못하면 좋지 않아요. 본론을 적을 때에는 두 개의 독립된 내용으로 구성된 문단을 만들어주셔야 하지, 지금처럼 본론1에서 하나를 쓰고, 본론2에서 이에 대한 예시로 채워서는 안 됩니다.
jene님께는 별개의 과제를 하나 더 드리겠습니다. 다음에 올리시는 글은 무조건 300자 이내로 끊어주시고, 그 중에서도 본론을 채우는데에 집중해주세요. 절대 화려하게 쓰려고 하지 마시고, 최대한 간결하게 쓰셔야 하며, 어휘이든 내용이든 문법이든 절대 욕심 내지 마시고 그냥 최대한 덜 틀리겠다는 생각으로 한번 써서 올려보세요! (310자까지는 용납해드리겠습니다.)
수고하셨습니다 :)