Third world countries need help from the international community. Some people prefer financial aid while others think practical aid and advice are better.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
It is controversial whether that undeveloped nations should be
aided through financial methods. People insist that what they need most is fund
itself, not practical items. However, there is a more persuasive argument that
foods or goods are more suitable because those can be distributed to the
citizens who truly need them.
On the one hand, third world countries usually run out
of budget, so they ask other countries for financial help. This measure has one
main advantage that money can be utilized for various needs reasons depending on the
facing issues of the undeveloped countries. Furthermore, dollars might be used
for importing products such as IT devices or oil from developed nations such as
USA or Arabic countries, so that it would be beneficial to other rich nations.
Nevertheless, I reckon foods or medical services are
more proper helps for the countries which are in poverty. If they get aid as a
form of fund, it can be used only for politicians or leaders of the nations
whereas I believe every people should receive benefit. Accordingly, it would induce or
worsen polarization of the economy. Moreover, since they are in a desperate
situation, it is possible that they spend money to research nuclear weapons as
an example of North Korea. In fact, North Korea is often blamed from the by UN for its
nuclear experiments utilizing relief funds from South Korea.
To summarize, even though relief money can be a way of
helping third world nations, it is appropriate to lend a hand to them by other
pragmatic ways concerning misusing of the money. (이전에도 말씀드렸듯이, 결론에서 여건이 되는 한에서 내 의견에 대해 강화해주시면 좋습니다.)
총평: (7/7/7/7) 7.0
사실 지금으로도 충분히 잘 쓰인 글이긴 합니다. 빨간 부분이 거의 없다는 점이 이를 뒷받침하고요. 그러나 sb님 실력을 고려했을 때 템플릿 없이도 이것보다 충분히 더 잘 쓰실 수 있을 것 같아서 개인적으로는 조금 아쉽긴 합니다! 최소한 결론 정도는 한번 손대보세요~굳이 템플릿 쓰지 않아도 좋은 문단을 만드실 수 있을 겁니다.
수고하셨습니다 :)