Can you give me all your suggestions about this essay and the average score, please.
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?
Before answering the question if wealthy nations should maintain the wealth of poorer nations by supplying them food, by providing them medical assistance and so on or this responsibility relies on the governments of the poorer nations, I'd like to find out why one nation is called Ťwealthyť and why the other nation is called Ťpoorť. Among the wealthy nations I can point out the USA, the UK, France and Germany. They provide a high level of education, social security and high life expectancy. As for poorer nations, the child and adult mortality rate is high, a life span is low due to military conflict and epidemics, the fact that doesn't occur in wealthier countries, without talking about education.
Wealthy countries may provide different charity acts like giving raw materials, donating products or money to struggle against famine or giving specialists in different fields of economics, medicine, education and so on. Reach nations also happen to organize a variety of international events on the poorer countries' territories (sport, musical etc...) which could contribute economical raise of such countries. As for military support, it helps to preserve the independence and keep the peace inside the country. Assistance of wealthy countries is favorable to the development of both countries and creates a background for further collaboration.
However, the assistance may also cause negative effects: running the risk of being influenced by another state or being under its political interference and economical leverage. I suppose that every medal has its reverse, the aid shouldn't be aggressive, especially it's very important to be suspicious of the benefits of military supply benefits. I think that the USA shouldn't have provided its military assistance to Syrian opposition while the President of Syria asked for help to the official government. Thus, wealthy nations are free to share their wealth among poorer nations, but the assistance with military help should be very careful.
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?
Before answering the question if wealthy nations should maintain the wealth of poorer nations by supplying them food, by providing them medical assistance and so on or this responsibility relies on the governments of the poorer nations, I'd like to find out why one nation is called Ťwealthyť and why the other nation is called Ťpoorť. Among the wealthy nations I can point out the USA, the UK, France and Germany. They provide a high level of education, social security and high life expectancy. As for poorer nations, the child and adult mortality rate is high, a life span is low due to military conflict and epidemics, the fact that doesn't occur in wealthier countries, without talking about education.
Wealthy countries may provide different charity acts like giving raw materials, donating products or money to struggle against famine or giving specialists in different fields of economics, medicine, education and so on. Reach nations also happen to organize a variety of international events on the poorer countries' territories (sport, musical etc...) which could contribute economical raise of such countries. As for military support, it helps to preserve the independence and keep the peace inside the country. Assistance of wealthy countries is favorable to the development of both countries and creates a background for further collaboration.
However, the assistance may also cause negative effects: running the risk of being influenced by another state or being under its political interference and economical leverage. I suppose that every medal has its reverse, the aid shouldn't be aggressive, especially it's very important to be suspicious of the benefits of military supply benefits. I think that the USA shouldn't have provided its military assistance to Syrian opposition while the President of Syria asked for help to the official government. Thus, wealthy nations are free to share their wealth among poorer nations, but the assistance with military help should be very careful.