Should wealthy nations be required to share their wealth among poorer nations by providing such things as food and education? Or is it the responsibility of the governments of poorer nations to look after their citizens themselves?
I think wealthy nations should be required to share their wealth among poorer nations. However, their help should stop at providing such things as food and education because of three following reasons.
Firstly, citizens of both wealthy nations and poorer nations are human beings. Therefore, we can not look at, hear of, and talk about people who lack food, education, housing, clothing, without compassion and sympathy. Sharing wealth among poorer nations is not only a good deed but also a duty itself.
Secondly, many nations in Africa and Asia are very, very poor. Famine, diseases, crime and illiteracy are killing their citizens. On the contrary, a lot of nations in Europe and America are very rich. If there are no actions taken, this inequality will increase dramatically. Poor countries will become poorer and poorer while rich countries will become richer and richer. As a result, poorest countries will be slaves of richest countries. So, sharing wealth is a useful way to prevent people from that bad future.
Thirdly, although sharing wealth among poorer nations is very necessary,this helping should only stop at providing such things as food, medicine and education. Or else, poor nations may depend on aid. They won’t have enthusiasm to build their countries by themselves. Moreover, rich nations can take advantage of sharing wealth to interfere deeply in poor nations’ governments. This can’t be considered humane action and should be prevented.
In my opinion, sharing wealth among poorer nations has both bad side and good side. What we have to do is avoid its bad side and practice its good side.
It Looks Like Band 7
Posts
9 comments:
Ashley H Chen- IELTS preparer
It is my strong opinion that wealthy nations should not be 'required' to shared their wealth among poorer nations.
There are a few reasons, one being that it is an infringe on personal rights on which causes to support with tax money. Be it a religious organization based in an affluent country or shelters for HIV children in third world countries, it should remain a tax-payer's right to decide where the charitable financial efforts go.
Reason two is no less important: it is principally wrong to demand one gives away the wealth one created simply on the ground that one is fortunate enough to be born into a society with more opportunities.
A third reason being that, what partly define us as human is compassion, an ability to related to other humans and innate desire to help the disadvantaged. Help given to third countries to provide basic human needs should not be 'required', but simply done out of humanitarian reasons.
At last, as an American scriptwriter put it, "The world isn't fair, we do what we can". Warren Buffett has set a fine example when he donated the majority of his wealth to Merlinda and Bill Gates Foundation. Gates Foundation not just grants the brightest academics from poorer nations, but also sponsored radical research that are not promising enough to receive government funding however when achieved a result, would have the most profound impacts. Such as research on a novel HIV cure. In a way, wealthy nations are sharing the wealth.
Ashley H Chen- IELTS preparer
It is my strong opinion that wealthy nations should not be 'required' to shared their wealth among poorer nations.
There are a few reasons, one being that it is an infringe on personal rights on which causes to support with tax money. Be it a religious organization based in an affluent country or shelters for HIV children in third world countries, it should remain a tax-payer's right to decide where the charitable financial efforts go.
Reason two is no less important: it is principally wrong to demand one gives away the wealth one created simply on the ground that one is fortunate enough to be born into a society with more opportunities.
A third reason being that, what partly define us as human is compassion, an ability to related to other humans and innate desire to help the disadvantaged. Help given to third countries to provide basic human needs should not be 'required', but simply done out of humanitarian reasons.
At last, as an American scriptwriter put it, "The world isn't fair, we do what we can". Warren Buffett has set a fine example when he donated the majority of his wealth to Merlinda and Bill Gates Foundation. Gates Foundation not just grants the brightest academics from poorer nations, but also sponsored radical research that are not promising enough to receive government funding however when achieved a result, would have the most profound impacts. Such as research on a novel HIV cure. In a way, wealthy nations are sharing the wealth.
Ashley H Chen- IELTS preparer
It is my strong opinion that wealthy nations should not be 'required' to shared their wealth among poorer nations.
There are a few reasons, one being that it is an infringe on personal rights on which causes to support with tax money. Be it a religious organization based in an affluent country or shelters for HIV children in third world countries, it should remain a tax-payer's right to decide where the charitable financial efforts go.
Reason two is no less important: it is principally wrong to demand one gives away the wealth one created simply on the ground that one is fortunate enough to be born into a society with more opportunities.
A third reason being that, what partly define us as human is compassion, an ability to related to other humans and innate desire to help the disadvantaged. Help given to third countries to provide basic human needs should not be 'required', but simply done out of humanitarian reasons.
At last, as an American scriptwriter put it, "The world isn't fair, we do what we can". Warren Buffett has set a fine example when he donated the majority of his wealth to Merlinda and Bill Gates Foundation. Gates Foundation not just grants the brightest academics from poorer nations, but also sponsored radical research that are not promising enough to receive government funding however when achieved a result, would have the most profound impacts. Such as research on a novel HIV cure. In a way, wealthy nations are sharing the wealth.
Ashley H Chen- IELTS preparer
It is my strong opinion that wealthy nations should not be 'required' to shared their wealth among poorer nations.
There are a few reasons, one being that it is an infringe on personal rights on which causes to support with tax money. Be it a religious organization based in an affluent country or shelters for HIV children in third world countries, it should remain a tax-payer's right to decide where the charitable financial efforts go.
Reason two is no less important: it is principally wrong to demand one gives away the wealth one created simply on the ground that one is fortunate enough to be born into a society with more opportunities.
A third reason being that, what partly define us as human is compassion, an ability to related to other humans and innate desire to help the disadvantaged. Help given to third countries to provide basic human needs should not be 'required', but simply done out of humanitarian reasons.
At last, as an American scriptwriter put it, "The world isn't fair, we do what we can". Warren Buffett has set a fine example when he donated the majority of his wealth to Merlinda and Bill Gates Foundation. Gates Foundation not just grants the brightest academics from poorer nations, but also sponsored radical research that are not promising enough to receive government funding however when achieved a result, would have the most profound impacts. Such as research on a novel HIV cure. In a way, wealthy nations are sharing the wealth.
Ashley H Chen- IELTS preparer
It is my strong opinion that wealthy nations should not be 'required' to shared their wealth among poorer nations.
There are a few reasons, one being that it is an infringe on personal rights on which causes to support with tax money. Be it a religious organization based in an affluent country or shelters for HIV children in third world countries, it should remain a tax-payer's right to decide where the charitable financial efforts go.
Reason two is no less important: it is principally wrong to demand one gives away the wealth one created simply on the ground that one is fortunate enough to be born into a society with more opportunities.
A third reason being that, what partly define us as human is compassion, an ability to related to other humans and innate desire to help the disadvantaged. Help given to third countries to provide basic human needs should not be 'required', but simply done out of humanitarian reasons.
At last, as an American scriptwriter put it, "The world isn't fair, we do what we can". Warren Buffett has set a fine example when he donated the majority of his wealth to Merlinda and Bill Gates Foundation. Gates Foundation not just grants the brightest academics from poorer nations, but also sponsored radical research that are not promising enough to receive government funding however when achieved a result, would have the most profound impacts. Such as research on a novel HIV cure. In a way, wealthy nations are sharing the wealth.
Ashley H Chen- IELTS preparer
It is my strong opinion that wealthy nations should not be 'required' to shared their wealth among poorer nations.
There are a few reasons, one being that it is an infringe on personal rights on which causes to support with tax money. Be it a religious organization based in an affluent country or shelters for HIV children in third world countries, it should remain a tax-payer's right to decide where the charitable financial efforts go.
Reason two is no less important: it is principally wrong to demand one gives away the wealth one created simply on the ground that one is fortunate enough to be born into a society with more opportunities.
A third reason being that, what partly define us as human is compassion, an ability to related to other humans and innate desire to help the disadvantaged. Help given to third countries to provide basic human needs should not be 'required', but simply done out of humanitarian reasons.
At last, as an American scriptwriter put it, "The world isn't fair, we do what we can". Warren Buffett has set a fine example when he donated the majority of his wealth to Merlinda and Bill Gates Foundation. Gates Foundation not just grants the brightest academics from poorer nations, but also sponsored radical research that are not promising enough to receive government funding however when achieved a result, would have the most profound impacts. Such as research on a novel HIV cure. In a way, wealthy nations are sharing the wealth.
well its not a bad
Nice post about IELTS Essay samples
Nice post about IELTS Essay samples
Post a Comment