Many people think that the countries in the world have moral obligation to help each other, while others argue that financial aid to poor countries is often misspent by government that receive it.
The issue has been widely debated in the world politic whether it's incumbent on countries to help to those impoverished nations.
The perplexing problem tend to raise the moral and economic concerns and dilemma.
First, to some people, the world is a global village, each country is likened to a member of a big family, and they believe that the countries have moral obligation to help each other. Therefore, developed nation should help the poor one just like people taking care of their sibling.
Moreover, with the rapid pace of globalization, the economic and political of many countries are closely connected with each other.
Thus, the financial crisis of one country may have chain effect on other countries within same regions. If one country is bankrupt, it would absolutely have influence on other neighboring nations. So from my point of view, the countries should offer a helping hand to those countries who faced the financial threat.
On the other hand, someone may concern that the money for underdevelopment countries is waste because their corrupt government will abuse the donation. Furthermore, it's also be criticized that the needy countries will become more rely on international aid. Hence, international assistance is not a good idea to solve the problem. But in my opinion, there are some alternatives to avoid the mishandle the beneficence. For instance, building a organization to supervise the usage of donation. If it could be sure that the money is used to help the developing nations to relieve the sufferings and poverty or improve the education quality, it can bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. Also, it is a way to achieve the goal of a harmonious world.
All in all, due to the humanitarianism and economic sense, I agree that the financial aid is of practical and moral important.
The issue has been widely debated in the world politic whether it's incumbent on countries to help to those impoverished nations.
The perplexing problem tend to raise the moral and economic concerns and dilemma.
First, to some people, the world is a global village, each country is likened to a member of a big family, and they believe that the countries have moral obligation to help each other. Therefore, developed nation should help the poor one just like people taking care of their sibling.
Moreover, with the rapid pace of globalization, the economic and political of many countries are closely connected with each other.
Thus, the financial crisis of one country may have chain effect on other countries within same regions. If one country is bankrupt, it would absolutely have influence on other neighboring nations. So from my point of view, the countries should offer a helping hand to those countries who faced the financial threat.
On the other hand, someone may concern that the money for underdevelopment countries is waste because their corrupt government will abuse the donation. Furthermore, it's also be criticized that the needy countries will become more rely on international aid. Hence, international assistance is not a good idea to solve the problem. But in my opinion, there are some alternatives to avoid the mishandle the beneficence. For instance, building a organization to supervise the usage of donation. If it could be sure that the money is used to help the developing nations to relieve the sufferings and poverty or improve the education quality, it can bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. Also, it is a way to achieve the goal of a harmonious world.
All in all, due to the humanitarianism and economic sense, I agree that the financial aid is of practical and moral important.