Some people think that developing countries need financial help from international organizations, while others think that it is practical aid an advice that is needed. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
It is clear that international assistance has been gaining a great deal of media attention in recent decades due to its substantial impacts on the globalized world. Although the proposal of finalcial help sound reasonable, I think practical aids and advices would pay more dividends.
On the one hand, there are several reasons why multinational organisations would provide money for developing nations. First, pecuniary assistance from outside organisations could solve the problem of inadequate public infrastructure as the local government has more money for the construction of buildings and roads for citizen. This would mitigate the gridlock in the urban areas and provide more shelter for homeless people, which promote better living standards. Second, financial injection from international government groups could lead to and increase in foreign companies and highly- industrialized parks in the funded nations. This could create more job opportunity for those citizens especially young generation, culminating in the decrease in unemplyment rate.
On the other hand,many practical and effective aids should be needed for a long-term sustainable development. The first reason is that operation reliefs from outside governments would act as an effective deterrent to the poverty and starvation. For example, many North Korean people in the poverty-stricken regions have been saved thanks to food and medicine from the neighboring affluent China, reducing the national officials’ financial burdens remarkably. In addition to commodity support, international organizations should establish more educational instituitions and professtional training courses in the developing nations. This would give those citizens more opportunity to experience a standardised academic environment, which help unlock their potential capacity.
In conclusion, effective and realistic assistance would be a foundational element for the sustainability of both economy and society of the developing nations.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-03-30 | grahamoneil | 67 | view |
- Rich countries should not employ skilled labour from poor countries as poor countries need the workers more Do you agree or disagree 80
- Some people support the development in agriculture such as factory farming and scientificcreation of new types of fruits and vegetables. Others oppose this view and support otherdevelopments. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 61
- Some people believe that if a police force carries guns, this encourages higher level of violence int hat society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 78
- Some people feel that entertainers such as film stars pop musicians or sports stars are paid too much money Do you agree or disagree Which other types of job should be highly paid 73
- Scientists predict in the near future cars will be driven by computers, not people. Why? Do you think it is a positive or negative development? 74
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 18, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , many
...n unemplyment rate. On the other hand,many practical and effective aids should be ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, second, so, for example, i think, in addition, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 41.998997996 71% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1725.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.07394366197 5.12529762239 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.3117521557 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.62323943662 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 534.6 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.4122849089 49.4020404114 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.692307692 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8461538462 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.61538461538 7.06120827912 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14936751281 0.244688304435 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.053520087139 0.084324248473 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0464987828225 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0923690920624 0.151304729494 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457389544467 0.056905535591 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 50.2224549098 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.93 12.4159519038 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.46 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.7795591182 167% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.