Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own disadvantaged people like the homeless or unemployed. To what extent do you agree or disagree? hay nhất giúp bạn có thêm tài liệu tham khảo để viết bài luận bằng Tiếng Anh hay hơn.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own

Đề bài: Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own disadvantaged people like the homeless or unemployed. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 1

Some argued that the government should not prioritize funding foreign aid over solving the financial difficulties of their socially underprivileged groups. With a whole host of problems arising from the burgeoning debt and overpopulation, I agree that the government should focus on tackling its own challenges first.

On the one hand, there are several reasons why the state budget should be used to ensure the well-being of each individual in the country. First, it is difficult to help others when your problems have not been resolved. The post-pandemic period has seen an astronomical increase in the unemployment rate and debt. Instead of donating money to poorer countries, the authorities should use the government budget to improve free social services such as healthcare, education and shelters for unfortunate individuals. Second, as underprivileged citizens are ensured the bare minimum living standards, they are motivated to find jobs to reach financial stability which would indirectly lead to economic growth. Last but not least, offering financial assistance to poor neighbours can be seen as a political manipulation strategy because the recipient has to obey the regulations set by the donor. For example, China helped Sri Lanka build a port paid entirely by the Chinese loan. However, the South Asia country failed to pay the debt, so they had to lease the port to China for 99 years.

On the other hand, donating money to underdeveloped countries does strengthen international relations and creates a strong bond between nations. This would lower the tax barriers which help domestic companies to penetrate new markets easily.

In conclusion, there are benefits for the government while funding international aid. Nonetheless, fully addressing problems in one’s country is more important than reaching out to help others.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 2

Some people believe that governments should not be contributing foreign aid while they have their own underprivileged citizens, such as those who are homeless or jobless. Personally, I completely disagree with this point of view.

There are several reasons why some people might believe that the government should prioritise their own citizens over helping other nations. Firstly, not all countries have a generous enough budget to invest in international aid, so they should prioritise the welfare of their own citizens. It is possible to find impoverished people in even the most developed countries, and it would take a large sum of money to help them all climb their way out of poverty. Moreover, resources for international aid can be allocated to help a country promote its own economic growth instead. For example, many factories could be built across the country, thus creating more job opportunities and facilitating revenue growth.  

Although I can understand the above arguments, I still think that it is necessary for governments to provide foreign assistance. In some countries, people are facing problems which can easily be solved with the help of other countries. For instance, just a few packets of rice can save many people from dying of starvation. Furthermore, countries can dramatically improve international relations through international aid, leading to greater cooperation between nations. Also, spending money on such a program can help address global issues that will affect all nations, such as climate change and migration, because people are less likely to move abroad or destroy forests to make way for agriculture when their living standards are improved.

In conclusion, I believe that countries should help each other for humanitarian purposes as well as their own development.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 3

It is argued that the state budget should not be allocated towards international support since underprivileged people such as the homeless and unemployed in the country need to be financially aided. I totally disagree with this notion as foreign aid enhances solidarity among nations and symbolizes human decency.

To begin with, I consider the government should provide overseas fiscal aid since it strengthens the unity of different nations around the globe. More specifically, a country which receives monetary assistance from others in times of difficulty would likely recognize this goodwill gesture and reciprocate their favour, fostering cross-border friendship. For instance, due to the financial support of the Russian government for Vietnam in the Vietnam War, these two nations have intensified their friendly relations. As a result, they have become strategic partners in terms of the global economy, leading to favourable trade concessions from which the donating country would financially benefit in another way.

Furthermore, financial support across the globe should be encouraged since it promotes humanity. To be more specific, politicians in wealthy countries can display their nation’s care and empathy for people in less economically developed ones by offering them financial support, enabling them to sustain their lives and solve urgent problems. To illustrate, during the Covid 19 pandemic, the US government financially supported Vietnam in the form of providing free Moderna vaccines for Vietnamese citizens as they faced a great health threat, saving thousands of people and being praised for their benevolence. Therefore, sharing and empathising could be highly valued, promoting a world rich in kindness.

In conclusion, I firmly maintain that foreign aid can intensify the bonds among nations and engender human empathy. It is advisable that the state should develop the nation to be able to financially offer support globally.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 4

Certain individuals are of the opinion that the governmental allocation of financial resources should be distributed to other impoverished countries while others suppose that it is of paramount importance to focus on curbing their domestic issues. From my perspective, I am in consummate agreement with the proposal of determining national priority on internal problems.

On the one hand, it is understandable that crossborder support is a symbol of humanity. Geographically, people are divided into different ethnicities but by nature, humanity is the core connected feature among individuals. Thus, it goes without saying that supporting other countries through the provision of financial or social assistance is a logical and praiseworthy action. Not to mention that helping other nations to deal with financial crises would eliminate the chances of illegal migration which is detrimental to surrounding developed regions.

However, I opine that concentrating on addressing domestic issues such as homelessness or unemployment should be of the utmost urgency of any country. To begin with, the financial fund from the government is regarded as a crucial means to reserve and maintain welfare schemes as well as social security. The smooth flow of how society works would create a favorable environment for job opportunities which accordingly increases the economic growth rate. Furthermore, employment chances, as a result, generate more personal budgets which people can use to afford decent shelters, decreasing the homelessness rate.

In conclusion, although transnational support should be executed as a gesture of humanity, I still believe that any government should put the goal of tackling internal issues in a country to be the top priority.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 5

International assistance is a voluntarily given resource transfer from one nation to another. I firmly think that every country should support other nations who are desperately trying to rebuild their economies. Certainly, both developing and wealthy nations must assist disadvantaged individuals residing in developing nations.

My first argument is that there won't be any humanitarian help if unemployment and homelessness are used as grounds for denial of aid. Homelessness and unemployment are problems in even the most affluent nations, such as the United States and the United Kingdom.

The world's underprivileged will have no one to turn to if such nations stop providing help. For instance, records from 2013 show that more than 6% of Americans were unemployed, although the US helped out with $30 billion. Even developing countries like India have budgeted a percentage of their annual spending for international assistance. The bigger picture is what matters most. Other nations must be lifted up in order for one nation to advance.

Second, the majority of aid has indirect advantages for the giving country, such as enabling resource extraction or opening up new economic opportunities for the receiving nation. Multinational businesses (MNCs), for instance, who have opened offices in India as a consequence of foreign aid, surely employ many young people, but they pay them significantly less than what they must pay their own country's workers. India is a significant commercial market due to its expanding population, and many foreign companies have established retail outlets there. Giving and receiving countries both benefit from assistance, therefore it is a win-win situation.

In addition, every country should offer its assistance in the case of an emergency or a natural disaster like an earthquake or a tsunami. Aid does not always take the form of money; it can also be provided in the form of goods that the afflicted people need or by the donation of unpaid labour. Such help needs to be given, even if there are problems within the nation. Additionally, this improves international relations.

In conclusion, I think that all nations should contribute by giving aid internationally, even if they are struggling with unemployment and homelessness.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 6

The ever-growing population across many countries in the world has brought along with it many problems such as poverty, illiteracy and massive layoffs. To tackle these problems, many governments have allocated a large number of resources. Given that all countries have their own problems to address, I agree with the argument that their priority should be given to their own disadvantaged people.

There are many reasons for which I believe governments ought to attach more importance to their own people. To begin with, should those governments spend financial resources on international aids, they would sooner or later suffer from scarce funds considering the fact that many of them have already been in debt. Under such a circumstance, it indeed makes more sense to reserve the money for the development and maintenance of their own social security measures such as health services for the sick and shelters for homeless people. Also, focusing on their own people contributes to the improvement of “post-donation” experience of taxpayers. After all, the government collects budgets from average taxpayers, and the latter are usually more sensitive to the needy people from the same community.

On the other hand, however, I would have to admit that donation to the poorer nations somehow plays a significant role in the process of achieving human decency and humanity. Without the aids from other countries, people living in impoverished regions may find it rather difficult to have their most fundamental survival needs satisfied. Stopping offering financial assistance to those people and meanwhile enjoying domestic prosperity, to some extent, is equivalent to indirectly depriving their last chance to survive, can lead to ethical challenges to the entire human society.

In summary, despite the significance of relief aids to foreign countries, I still believe that the government should help their own disadvantaged residents first. After all, it is impossible for a single country to eliminate poverty and unemployment altogether.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 7

Evolution of globalization makes the connection between countries stronger. Nowadays, every country is finding useful resources for their economic growth. The government of these countries uses these resources to earn money in order to progress and to provide international aid to those countries who are in need. However, some people offend such actions of their nation’s government. I disagree with this statement and will provide credible reasons to prove it.

Firstly, I believe that providing international aid will help the country itself because this can strengthen their relationship among other nations and will open a door to many opportunities. For instance, when the richest country provides health and education facilities to the poor country, this will enable them to recruit more staff to work in that country, which will solve their problem of unemployment. Moreover, working in these areas might improve the resources of the poor nation which will further open more scopes in these sectors. Also, setting up industries in various nations will turn out to be the two-way profit. Like, telecommunication industries benefit both giver and recipient nations. 

Secondly, providing assistance on natural calamities occurrences like earthquake, floods etc.  are what we call humanity. Every country should have the separate foreign aid account for the sake of humanity. This can help the suffered nation to recover fast. When the developed countries give aid and abet to underdeveloped nations, in return they get some share to use their resources. For example, USA, holding shares in oil companies of the Middle East nations. 

In the end, I think it would be appropriate to say that the international subsidy will be useful in eradicating poverty, unemployment, and homelessness in their own home rather than creating it.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 8

It is a big concern for many people that it is not a compulsory responsibility of their government to provide international aid to other countries owing to the fact that they have some obstacles in their home country. In my opinion, I would like to stay in the middle of this debate.

Firstly, one important aspect of a government is to invest money in their own country instead of giving wealth to other countries. In fact, it is true that when the unemployment rate is high in a country and people of this country need better economic structure, they would not support that their governments supply aid and money to other poor countries. Naturally, they would expect their own problems to be sorted out first. For instance, if any government invests money in the constructions of many new organisations like factories and health departments in their homeland, there will be more chances of development of country and high opportunities to control on unemployment.

Another important thing for any country’s government is to provide homes and some other facilities for homeless people rather than lending money to other countries because in this way the economy would be better than before in that country. If any government has extra money, firstly they should focus on compulsory needs of their own country after that it can be provided as the international aid to other countries.

However, we live in a single globe and when people in some parts of the world are starving, many others have opulent resources. Sharing among nations can ensure a better world. The economic structure of the present world would never allow a country to ensure 100% employment and houses for people to live in. There will always be homeless people and jobless youth even in developed countries. So considering these, a rich nation should always help the poor nations in need. Don’t we help people with our resources and money when we still have a scarcity of these? Similarly, a comparatively rich country should always raise the helping hand to the poor nations. The sharing of wealth will eliminate more pressing problems in poor nations and thus in return they would also help in other ways. For example, rich countries like the USA invest in research facilities in many Asian countries and in return they can have meritorious scientists living and working for them and better business understanding.

In conclusion, the government of a country should first fulfil the necessity of its own citizens. To a certain extent, they should share their extra wealth with poor countries as the international aid that can be helpful for both of the countries.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 9

No country around the world is self-reliant. It is said that if a country has unemployment and poverty, it should not help other countries. I completely disagree with this viewpoint because aiding other nations can help the government to redress problems that have prevailed in their own country.

Giving monetary help to a country that is in distress can in turn reduce the problem of unemployment in one's own country. Every government has a limited capacity to create jobs every year. If they spend the whole revenue on generating employment, it can compromise other developments. But when the state provides money to other nations, it develops a good relationship between countries. Such harmonious relations culminate in signing trade agreements, memorandum of understandings, and opening bilateral business opportunities. By working together, all governments can eliminate their country-specific issues. For instance, in 2011, Japan was ravaged by tsunamis and lost the property of billions of dollars. Despite having millions of unemployed youths in the country, the Indian government gave ten million dollars to Japan. Because of this humanitarian assistance, in the year 2018, Japan started the project of bullet trains in India and created thousands of jobs. Thus, giving aid to other countries is beneficial for donner countries.

Similarly, it can also assist a country to come out of poverty if it helps other nations. All countries have a finite number of resources. Some countries do not have many resources that could generate enough goods and services to sustain their economy; people of such countries have to work hard, but they receive less income. In this situation, a cordial relationship with the governments of other countries can help a state to send its people to these countries for work. From where, people can earn more money and send remittance. Consequently, help to alleviate poverty in the home country.

To conclude, every country lacks in one or another way. By helping other countries, a state can redress their problems, which cannot be reduced by themselves. Therefore, I disagree with the viewpoint and believe that the state should help other nations.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 10

International aid is the transfer of goods or services from a country or international organization to benefit another country. Support can be economical or humanitarian. Some think that their government should not spend on international aid because there are underprivileged people in their own country. I completely agree with this idea. In the forthcoming paragraphs, I shall explain why countries should give priority to their internal problems.

Firstly, a developed country should examine its debt ceiling before volunteering to help other countries. The US is a classic example. According to a survey, the US national debt was about $26 trillion in June 2020. It has increased to almost 800% of what it was in 1989. This would bring down the value of the dollar and impact negatively on the economy and international investments. Eventually, it would aggravate the unemployment problem within the country. So, it is high time that the nation concentrated on reducing its debts rather than contributing to international aid. If these countries continue to fund other nations, it will cause serious social unrest within their country.

There is no evidence that the countries receiving foreign aid are progressing economically. Also, according to a survey, foreign aid consumes a considerable amount in the budget which can be used for the nation’s welfare. Furthermore, the countries receiving support are not committed to remaining loyal to the donor country in times of crisis and may not yield to the donor’s interests. Donor countries also need to be wary of the fact that they contribute only their share and don’t overdo the aid.

Despite the fact that developed countries should be merciful on third world countries, I feel that intra-governmental development should gain priority over helping others.

In conclusion, though it is deemed merciless to stop funding the underdeveloped countries, it should be noted that solving the intragovernmental problems in a developed country is of more importance. Only a self-sustained country will be able to donate generously to other countries.

Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own - mẫu 11

The foreign aid budget is at the forefront of national debates and is driving political discourse. Many argue that governments ought not to extend aid to other countries if there are underprivileged, destitute, and homeless people within their own borders. In this case, this essay partly agrees with the stand.

The opponents of granting foreign aid insist that charity always begins at home. For them, it is unacceptable that the governments spend money on alleviating poverty abroad while unemployment, homelessness, and poverty exist in their own territories. Apart from that, a growing number of empirical evidence shows that a substantial amount, as much as one-seventh of overseas aid, is captured by the ruling elite in recipient nations, either spent on luxury goods and real estate or diverted into tax heavens. So, I believe that governments should place the welfare of their own citizens ahead of others.

Having said that, giving overseas aid reaps considerable benefits. In the first case, when a nation helps develop emerging markets, and that investment allows it to earn the financial rewards of close trading ties with recipient nations. Aside from reaping commercial advantages, a country increases its soft power by spending on international aid, does not only enhance global security but also helps the country attain its policy goals, such as combating climate change, abroad. According to Joe Cerrell of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, for example, this means that aid is “an investment in our shared security and prosperity”. Therefore, granting aid to other countries is not purely selfless.

In the light of the above discussion, it seems reasonable to conclude that governments should find an ideal balance between these conflicting interests. I would end by quoting Francis Bacon “Charity begins at home but should not end there”.

Xem thêm các bài luận Tiếng Anh hay khác:

• The shortage of housing in big cities can cause severe consequences. Only government action can solve this problem. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• Some people believe teenagers should focus on all subjects equally, whereas other people think that they should concentrate on only those subjects that they find interesting. Discuss both views and provide your opinion.

• To succeed in a business, one needs to be good at maths. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• In the future, it seems more difficult to live on Earth. Some people think more money should be spent on researching other planets to live on, such as Mars. To what extent do you agree with this statement?

• It has been suggested that all young adults should be required to undertake a period of unpaid work helping people in the community. Would the drawbacks be greater than the benefits to the community and the young adults themselves?

• Hơn 20.000 câu trắc nghiệm Toán,Văn, Anh lớp 9 có đáp án

---