Both the lecture and the reading hold
different positions, respectively, on the issue of Microcredit system. The
lecture’s argument is formed around many points that are in direct contrast to
the material in the reading passage.
First of all, the lecturer mentions that if
people who living in poverty received education and training they can use the
system effectively. Through this training, it can prevent people to default in
risk. In addition, if they followed instructions well, they can utilize the
system maximize. This contradicts the reading passage’s claim that poverty
people don’t have any well-ordered educations and experience, so they will be
failed to use the loans.
Secondly, the lecturer says that if people
made a group to use a microcredit, they can reduce extra fees of loans. For
example, small society community can make a one group and then, they use the
system together, they cannot to take higher interest rate or administration
fees alone. As a result, they can enjoy their life.
Lastly, the lecturer argues that the government
doesn’t participate in microcredit system. Instead of the government, nonprofit
organization or banks offer the system. So, the system was not affected on government’s
funding. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s claim that government
funding will reduce when they invest on microcredit system, so the government
cannot afford to invest on others fields such as welfare system.