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?
These days, with the development of finance and technology, many developed-countries provide financial aid to developing-countries; however, the money does not deal with poverty. Therefore, rich countries should support the poorer countries by different ways instead of financial aid. From my point of view, I strongly agree with this view.
To begin with, the financial aid which developed-countries provide to poor countries would be reduced. The money that recipients receive can be cutback in transaction fees. For example, according to USA news, the percentage of money that China gave to Angola reduced significantly via the expensive tax. Therefore, people in Angola just received almost 60% of the financial aid. So, that is why supporting poor countries by providing financial aid is not an effective way.
On the other hand, developed-countries can help developing-countries by directly sending intelligent educators and successful economists there to help them grow. Good educators in rich countries can help teachers in poor countries how to reduce illiteracy for every children, adults and even elderly people. For instance, Japan sent some of their smart teachers to Afghanistan to help children study and they also sent successful entrepreneur there to teach people how to manage small enterprise. Beside, poor countries can also choose their best students to go abroad to study and find ways to develop their countries. That are some types of help more beneficial than giving money to poor countries .
In conclusion, poor countries can develop faster as long as rich countries use different ways to support instead of giving financial aid . Hence, authorities should bring those ways into practice.
- 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
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 699, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...cial than giving money to poor countries . In conclusion, poor countries can deve...
^^
Line 4, column 50, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...sion, poor countries can develop faster as long as rich countries use different wa...
^^
Line 4, column 137, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... support instead of giving financial aid . Hence, authorities should bring those w...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, however, if, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in conclusion, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1453.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 264.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.50378787879 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31976174183 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 176.041082164 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.575757575758 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 433.8 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.4233428556 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8666666667 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06120827912 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.457312499333 0.244688304435 187% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.174273953821 0.084324248473 207% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.144381431664 0.0667982634062 216% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.296227974427 0.151304729494 196% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0215882180458 0.056905535591 38% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.0946893788 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.32 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.58950901804 95% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 78.4519038076 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 699, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...cial than giving money to poor countries . In conclusion, poor countries can deve...
^^
Line 4, column 50, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...sion, poor countries can develop faster as long as rich countries use different wa...
^^
Line 4, column 137, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... support instead of giving financial aid . Hence, authorities should bring those w...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, however, if, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in conclusion, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1453.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 264.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.50378787879 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31976174183 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 176.041082164 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.575757575758 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 433.8 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.4233428556 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8666666667 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06120827912 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.457312499333 0.244688304435 187% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.174273953821 0.084324248473 207% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.144381431664 0.0667982634062 216% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.296227974427 0.151304729494 196% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0215882180458 0.056905535591 38% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.0946893788 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.32 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.58950901804 95% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 78.4519038076 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.