Some people think that charity organizations should only offer help to people of their own country. But others believe that these organizations should give aid to people in great need wherever they live. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Some people feel that charity structures should only help people of their own country. Others claim that these structures should offer help to everyone in the world in great need. Before drawing a conclusion let's first analyse both views.
There are several reasons why charity organizations should only help people of their country. First of all, the life of the citizens has a big effect on country's economy. For instance, by putting all money from charities for giving aid to poor people would raise the level of life there, which would further lead to economy growth. Secondly, these organizations may not be able to help other countries in some conditions. For example, less developed countries can hardly help their own citizens, so it is impossible to offer help to others.
On the other hand, there are also arguments to support the view that charities should also offer aid to other people in need. Firstly, highly developed countries should help less developed regions as they are not able to solve the problem of poverty and hunger. For example, African countries suffer from poverty and the government doesn't have enough resources to do anything by themselves so they can only rely on transfers from outside. Finally, by giving aid to others country can have a big influence on the country-recipient and can get some preferences for trading, commerce and etc.
All in all, there are convincing arguments to support both views, but as far as I am concerned charity organizations should offer help to everyone in need.
You did a really good job with your transitions in each paragraph. However, you should add at least two more sentences to discuss your opinion. Here are some changes I have suggested for your paper. The corrections are in order according to the paragraph that was written.
-I think you should replace structures with organizations. Place a comma after conclusion. Also, there is a misspelling of "analyze".
-In the second paragraph and first sentence, I think you should replace of with "from". Change the next sentence to: "First, the life of the citizens has a big effect on the country's economy." Here is an example that shows you how you can change the next sentence: "For instance, the money charities give to aid poor people would raise the standard of life, which would further lead to economic growth."
-When you describe transfers from outside you should be more specific. You discuss other countries early in the paragraph. You could say in your example that this country relies on help from other countries or nations. This will help clarify or make your ideas more clear. In the next sentence, place a comma after others and add "a" before country.
-You should end your paper with a different transition word. You could use, in summary or in conclusion. Place a comma after concerned.
A very incitefull essay. You really did a good job analyzing the two sides of the issue.0which would further lead to economy growth...
You took the position of helping your own country, and raisedit to an economic issue. CORRECTED: which would lead to economic growth...
You need to condense your ideas for a concise approach. Also, note thedifference between nouns and adjectives.
should have less developed regions...
Are you saying that poor neighborhoods arejustified? What is the justification? You need to explain more.
You seem to go back and forth, without taking a side, I think that a good essay will give a strong opinion,, that is backed byfacts.
Although you analyze well, you needto answer the part of the question which asks what you think.
Try outlining your thoughts, and giving it some more thought. If you can create a 5 paragraph essay, with intro and conclusion, you will be in a better place. Start with an opinion, and defend it. You can still have factsfrom both sides.
Good start!
ef. _carol
