T2

[Shokir]

Improvements in health, education and trade are essential for the development of the poorer nations. However, the governments of richer nations should take more responsibility for helping the poorer nations in such areas.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

There is an undisputable fact that an increase of health, education and trade are crucial for the nations who have less fortune. However, at this point, what really matters is that should more affluent country share its wealth with these countries? Though, this is a matter of debate which will be expounded further and will show my attitude of the issue.

There are, however, several strong arguments of richer nations to take responsibility for helping the poorer nations. Undoubtedly it would be completely reasonable in terms of humanity. Moreover, another advantage that derives my agreement for this is developing reciprocal relationships. Besides, it aids to form a friendly atmosphere among countries. Another justification of my concurrence is that it may pave the way of various exchange programs in the midst of countries. For instance, change of up-to-date technologies in response cheap workforce. In my view, benefit from that. And this is the main reason of why I tend to support this idea.

On the other hand the case which mitigates the coincidence of my thoughts with the topic could be betrayal of one’s confidence. Sometimes, for example, wealthy nations can be more detrimental than being helpful by requiring more than they put in.

All things considered, I believe, such cases like misunderstanding each other always will have been prevented in advance and for that reason I vote for rich nations to help poorer ones to get their own feet.

[David.IELTS.Examiner]

Hello!

This is one of my favourite questions!

Introduction - 'countries' not 'country', attitude towards

First main paragraph - 'however' is used incorrectly (delete it), derives my agreement (?), concurrence (?), the exchange programmes are an example of relationships not a separate point, in the midst of countries (?), the technologies/workforce sentence makes no sense

Second main paragraph - I have no idea what this paragraph means and it's far too short anyway

Conclusion - certainly not demonstrated by the arguments presented in the essay and the point about misunderstandings is totally unclear to me. It's certainly not developed in any way.

Overall, a very weak response as at least half of the essay is virtually incomprehensible, partly due to poor use of vocabulary. No real points are made and certainly none are clearly developed.

All the best,
David

[Miaacoby]

Improvements in health, education and trade are essential for the development of the poorer nations. However, the governments of richer nations should take more responsibility for helping the poorer nations in such areas.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?


Development of a poorer nation depends on increase in level of quality of health, education and trade.Some people argue that a poor nation should help itself to improve these areas while other have opinion that the richer nations should provide support.It is argued that richer nations should take responsibility for improvement of health, educations and trade of poorer nations as it will indirectly improve their employment market and trade results.This is being analyzed below.

There is an indisputable fact that an increase of health, education and trade are crucial for the nations who have less fortune. However, at this point, what really matters is that should more affluent country share its wealth with these countries? Though, this is a matter of debate which will be expounded further and will show my attitude of the issue.


Firstly, helping a poorer nation in areas of health, education and trade will result in development of quality professionals in the poorer country. As a result, improved and attractive employment market of richer nations would attract those professionals and they will opt for employment opportunities in richer countries in search of better benefits. In turn, the richer country will benefit in the form of low wage employees. Example of USA and Philippine can be seen as an example. United States had been providing funding to educational and health sources of Philippines for a decade and now almost 37% employees of USA are Philippines who are working at low wages. Hence benefits of a richer country for helping a poorer nation can be seen.


There are, however, several strong arguments of richer nations to take responsibility for helping the poorer nations. Undoubtedly it would be completely reasonable in terms of humanity. Moreover, another advantage that derives my agreement for this is developing reciprocal relationships. Besides, it aids to form a friendly atmosphere among countries. Another justification of my concurrence is that it may pave the way of various exchange programs in the midst of countries. For instance, change of up-to-date technologies in response cheap workforce. In my view, benefit from that. And this is the main reason of why I tend to support this idea.


Secondly, helping a poorer nation in areas of health, education and trade will result in indirect development of trade for donor country. Improvement in these three areas will result in increase in level of education and health which will directly affect quality of production of the poorer country. In turn ,the richer country will get low cost products. Thus, the richer country economy will benefit from this affect. For example, Russia has been investing in Hospitals development, Universities development and market development. In turn, Russia has been harnessing benefits of low cost vegetables which Russia can not afford to cultivate itself.Thus economy of a richer country indirectly get benefit from investment in health, education and trade of a poorer country.

On the other hand the case which mitigates the coincidence of my thoughts with the topic could be betrayal of one’s confidence. Sometimes, for example, wealthy nations can be more detrimental than being helpful by requiring more than they put in.

After analyzing impact of investment of richer countries in economies of poorer countries, it can be concluded that richer countries should help poorer countries in health, education and trade as this will indirectly impact their own employment market and trade results. I would suggest that the donor countries enhance their investment in poorer countries to reap the indirect benefits.

All things considered, I believe, such cases like misunderstanding each other always will have been prevented in advance and for that reason I vote for rich nations to help poorer ones to get their own feet.