IELTS Writing Task 2/ Essay Topics with sample answer.
IELTS Essay 356 - Should wealthy nations be required to share their wealth
- Details
- Last Updated: Thursday, 05 May 2022 15:53
- Written by IELTS Mentor
- Hits: 195237
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the following topic:
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 citizen themselves?
Use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and with relevant evidence.
You should write at least 250 words.
Sample Answer 1:
Some school of thought believe that strong economies should aid the poor countries in terms of supporting them in their primary needs, while some others think it is due to the local governments to deal with such internal problems. Although both the parties have some strong justifications to support their ideas, I personally agree with the first group more because of several key factors including lack of resources in such poor economies, the fact that we are living in a global society.
The first important point I would like to mention is the fact that most of the poor economies are suffering from lack of having enough facilities and resources in the fields such as education and food. As the first may lead to making them even poorer and also increases the number of criminal actions and even worse in some cases potentially making some people joining terroristic groups. While the latter causes several unpleasant results such as children disability and death.
Another important thing is we should not forget all the people in the world are part of one community, the human being. Regardless of all the things makes us different, we all share the same biology. Therefore, as a human everybody should try his/her best to do what he can to make the world a pleasant place for the others. Moreover, as it mentioned above, some of the negative results such as terrorism may directly affect the other nations including first world countries.
To put everything in a nutshell, supporting the poor countries to make a better life for their people will cause several pleasant results not only domestically but in some cases internationally and more importantly, it all is justified by humanity.
[by Amin]
Sample Answer 2:
Although there is a wide disparity in the resources available to the people living in different countries, still, I would argue that the government should be accountable for fulfilling its citizens day to day needs.
It is imperative that the government in each country is held responsible for providing its citizen basic needs. Firstly, if help is always at hand, some governments may not put in all their efforts to meet both hands, while, few others are going an extra mile to cater for their own as well as the other nations demand. Poor nations can borrow money from world bank to set up, for instance, short scale industries to create employment for its people and boost the economy in long run. Various other steps can always be taken by venturing in trade and commerce for well- being of the nation.
Secondly, it may seem unfair to the citizens of the nation providing support that the taxes paid by them for the development of their own nation are being used towards others. Furthermore, it is also a herculean task to categorise all the nations into rich and poor, and then to select a criterion to decide the priority among nations seeking help. Despite all that, we all should be ready to offer help to a nation in times of crisis that arise due to unforeseen circumstances, for instance, floods, earthquake, hurricanes.
In conclusion, the common needs of a man should be looked after by the ruling government he chose for himself while in times of calamities, we all should stand united for each other.
[by Payal Garg]
Sample Answer 3:
There is a considerable debate over charity and aid system in first world countries. This essay is about the necessity of providing life supplies and education to nations which can’t stand on their feet and why these nations should be responsible for providing aid to poor countries.
First of all, it all started with the invention of steam power. Human kind's exploration chances have risen enormously with this invention and as a result of this colonisation became a real deal. While masters increased their wealth, slaves' life standard decreased tremendously. Because of this decrease in life standards, many of the former colonies don't have the power to provide their own nation with even basic requirements. From another point of view, living and education is a birth right of humanity and these shouldn't be a concern normally. Wealthy nations should also take responsibility to provide suitable life needs it most. For instance, anyone who seeks for justice should have right to escalate their case to European Court of Human Rights and similar processes should be available for people who are seeking for their born rights such as foods and education.
On the other hand, the main reason why people favour the idea not to share their wealth with others is that it would mean the end of colonisation worldwide. They believe that they had plenty of time to improve their economy. As a result of this, it was the poor nations' problem to take care of their mess.
In conclusion, my personal view about charity and aid to poor nations is a responsibility of both parts. Wealthy nations should provide local governments with aid and guidance to offer their nation with better life standards.
[by Demir Olmezses]
Sample Answer 4:
Our world is a very diverse place, and not always in a good way. There is a huge disproportion in terms of wealth and resources across different countries, and this state of affairs raises the question of whether richer nations should aid those less fortunate or rather let them fight their battle for themselves.
On the one hand, giving poor countries food, resources or money without getting anything in return, such as goods or services, is bound to remove any motivation for them to develop and to do something to improve their situation. This may create a vicious circle, similar to the common problem where some unemployed people abuse the welfare system by not even trying to find a job. This concern is one of the top reasons why some are convinced that it is the governments of poorer nations who should be responsible for the well-being of their citizens.
On the other hand, many people believe that helping countries that suffer from poverty is a moral duty and can benefit both rich and poor nations by making the world a better place. They argue that the right type of aid, first of all, education, gives poor countries a chance to get back on their feet and start changing for the better. The question of whether the charity is a good approach to dealing with poverty has always been a matter of debate.
Personally, I think that although wealthy nations should not be obliged to help the poorer ones, it seems like the right thing to do. Apart from humanitarian reasons, it can also bring about some political and economic benefits to the donors as they are creating a foundation for future cooperation and potential trade.
[by Olga Duma]
Sample Answer 5:
Development of any territory is influenced by the availability of basic amenities. The scarcity of facilities such as food and education obstruct the growth of a country. Some people believe that affluent nations should be accountable for making these things accessible for fortuneless countries. However, I tend to believe that these services should be provided by its own ruling party.
To begin with, the government should fulfil the necessities of the people because of whom they got the power. For instance, most countries use the voting system for selecting government and, hence, satisfying people becomes a major duty of the party in power. If the party fails to support their residents with facilities like food and education, it may result in their failure in next election. Thus, it is obvious that legal entity is chargeable for taking care of their natives.
In addition to this, native people pay various types of taxes to the government. A good illustration for this is the certifications which are held at the university level and its fees always include some amount of tax. If, after paying education tax, the government fails to provide a better level of schools and universities, residents may prefer giving chance to some other political party in next elections. Therefore, chances of losing control over individuals will be increased and hence it becomes inevitable for government to refute their duties.
For above, it can be concluded that in order to maintain its position, the government of needy nations should be concerned towards satisfying the needs of its citizens. If elected command succeeds in this, they may be able to attract people from other nations towards their country which may help boost economy of the country. As a consequence, developing nation will be turned into developed one in near future.
[by Aqeela]
Sample Answer 6:
The world economy today is a complex juxtaposition of wealthier nations on one hand and not so wealthy on the other. The developed western countries seem to be living in a futuristic era while the rest of the world is caught in medieval mindsets and technologies. This enormous gap cannot be bridged without co-operation from both sides of the divide. This essay outlines two perspectives from diametrically opposite angles.
Wealthy economies must understand that in today's heavily interconnected world; they cannot prosper in an isolated manner. An Ebola outbreak in Liberia, for example, is as much of a threat to the people in Europe or America, thanks to modern day travelling, as it is to rest of the world. And so it becomes an obligation on richer countries to provide the affected areas not only short-term aid like health expertise but also to help with better food and education in order for those countries to handle and control future outbreaks. So as seen from above example, rich nations ought to help others in providing better access to food, education, healthcare etc.
On the contrary, though, the countries on receiving the end of such an aid should strive to become independent by the day. For instance, it is not possible to feed 1.3 billion people solely on foreign aid. The Indian government has to come out with policies to promote innovation in agriculture so as to be able to be self-sufficient eventually. So as seen from the above, developing nations have an equal obligation to try and stand on their own feet.
To summarise, it is impossible to close that gigantic valley between the rich and poor countries without mutual effort from both the parties. It is hoped that we forget those artificial international borders and tackle this problem as a humanity to create an egalitarian world where no child is starved and no student is deprived of education.
[by Tejas Gokhale]
Sample Answer 7:
In today’s world, industrialises countries such as America, Germany and England are amazingly wealthy while people in third world countries are suffering from poverty and many other related problems. So, it becomes a highly debatable issue whether it is the responsibility of governments of those poor nations to help their citizens or the rich countries should share their wealth and resources to them.
It sounds reasonable that governments of poor nations are mainly responsible for improving the living status of their people. But for a country without any resources or investment, it would be very difficult to improve the economic status without any help from other rich nations. If wealthy nations share a certain portion of their wealth to the poor nations, it will be a great help to initiate new businesses and investment for a poor nation. Moreover, the basic needs of a country such as education and health can be filled up by donation of medicines and teaching materials.
On the other hand, some people argue that sharing of wealth and donations of the basic needs to poor nations is not a real help. Because all these can easily be used up in a short time and no long term benefits might be expected. In addition, it is not sure that the financial support is going into investment for country’s business or it is lost in corruption, a common problem in developing and underdeveloped countries. So, they suggest that instead of material and monetary supply, wealthy nations should better help poor countries with technology and expert skills. For example, they should send the expert technician or professionals to developing countries to teach them advanced technology which can improve their business and lifestyle. Furthermore, young people from poor nations should be sponsored by prosperous nations for further educations. In short, a combination of technology and trained efficient young professionals can build up the long term economic status of the country.
In summary, as it is impossible for the governments of poor nations to help the citizens on their own, any supply for short term or long run from the rich would be a very valuable help for them.
[by Thandar Aung]
Sample Answer 8:
Nowadays, a lot of disasters are coming to different countries like earthquake, flood and typhoon. These disasters are some of the reasons why other countries are having trouble with their life. Because of these a lot of building industries, farms, schools and houses are destroyed that can lead to the shortness of the resources of one nation. Trauma also can be an additional factor to down countries. Besides, some countries lack the technological development, natural resources and skilled manpower which are required to develop the overall condition of a country. Thus the question arises, whether the rich nations should raise their helping hands to those poor nations or the government of those poor nations should take initiative to change the fate of the nations.
In order to lift up the underdeveloped countries, some type of help is needed. Besides, other nations are lucky to have better positions that are not prone to disaster and also rich in natural resources. In addition, some of these nations have invented high technology gadgets which play as a business wherein they get their funds for some projects of a country. Therefore, in my opinion, the fortunate nations should aid to the poorer nations according to their willingness, status and laws.
Although helping others are very warm feeling, it should be watched out for. It should be taken care of also to avoid dependency and abuse that can lead to war and discrimination of different cultures.
In summary, the one who has a better status in life or in government must render concern to others with limitations in order to teach also independence and bring back the confidence of an underdeveloped country.
[by Maidas]
Sample Answer 9:
It is true that many countries of this world are facing different types of problems especially they have the lack of food and appropriate education. It is frequently believed that it is the responsibility of the richer country to provide these basic things to the poorer country. However, this serious issue is refuted by others. These arguments will be analysed prior to coming to a reasoned conclusion.
On the one hand, today, many hold the idea that it is the moral and ethical duty of the wealthier nations to help the developing countries who are confronting the many problems such as war, famine, drought, lack of food and appropriate education system etc. For instance, many countries, Afghanistan and Iraq in particular, have serious problem with these issues. Many people of these countries are living without enough food. Moreover, the governments of these countries don’t have ample amount of money to build a suitable education system for their people. This example makes it clear that these countries would not be able to improve from this miserable condition without help. That is why many people believe that aid is indispensable for these poor countries.
On the other hand, it is felt by many that the governments of the poorer countries should solve these dangerous problems for many reasons. Firstly, when the richer country gives money as a support for the poorer country, they also want to control the regimes of the poor countries, which may have brought the catastrophic effect on the underdeveloped country. Secondly, the administration of the poorer nation is not so experienced, so they maybe not able to properly utilise these supported things. Finally, most governments of the poorer countries are corrupted, so there is a great risk to misuse these supported things. For these reasons, many are against of this idea.
In conclusion, after conducting these analyses, it is clear that both points of view have logical arguments. However, in my opinion, the governments of the poorer countries should take the responsibility of their people. Otherwise, the richer country will control the poorer country.
[by Jahangir Alam ]
Sample Answer 10:
Today’s world is divided into industrialised countries and poor nations, where the main difference between them is the amount of money that they spend in the healthcare system, commerce and infrastructures. Most of those developing nations are living under the poverty line, and in my opinion, wealthy nations have the ability and the responsibility to help them.
Rich countries are more capable of helping those less fortunate countries than their own governments because of many reasons. Firstly, most poor nations are buried into debts as a result of their unbalanced finance and inexperienced or corrupted administrations. This reflected in a weak and failed healthcare and education system and a weak international trade policy. This vicious cycle will continue unless rich countries take the responsibility of helping those nations and minimising the huge worldwide economic difference. For example, the World Bank can nullify their debts or rich nations can help them with some projects to help to pay for these debts. Secondly, many of those countries are living in subhuman conditions because of extreme poverty and epidemic diseases such as AIDS and cholera and they either do not have the knowledge or the sufficient medical resources to improve this situation. However, developed countries can donate free drugs, and send doctors and nurses to treat and educate infected population so as to prevent these diseases from spreading.
On the other hand, many people from poor countries immigrate to rich countries to work or study. This result in many consequences: the first consequence is that they help to improve the economy of developed countries. For example in countries like the UK or FRANCE, there are lots of emigrants who prove themselves by their knowledge and hard working. Then it seems to be sensible that these wealthy nations should, in turn, help their home countries. In addition, the economy of poor countries gets worse because they have lost their most skilful and educated people while they need them to work and lead these nation to a better future. Finally, it would be difficult for poor nations to help themselves and grow without basic needs such as food, shelter, treatment and education.
In conclusion, I believe that it would be less likely to see any improvement in developing nation economy and status without the cooperation of wealthy countries.
[by Omnia Touski ]
Use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and with relevant evidence.
There has been an ongoing debate whether affluent countries should give help to less fortunate countries' citizens the basic commodities like food and education. Some say that it is the leaders' job of these poor countries to provide for their constituents. This essay agrees that wealthy nations should help other nations that are in need. Firstly, it will help form a strong bond among nations. Secondly, poor nations are sometimes just caught up in the middle of the chaos for many reasons that render them their inability to stand on their own.
Well-established nations that have huge wealth should be mandated to aid nations that do not have enough funds. It is a way to help these poor nations to progress as a country and will be indebted to nations that helped them along the way. As a result, it strengthens the bond between countries that will be beneficial to the citizens of both ends. At the pandemic's peak, Filipino nurses are warmly welcomed in the UK to work as a supply of front liners to battle with the crisis. In return, the UK and Philippines' relationship became stronger because the UK opened its doors to higher employment opportunities for a large number of Filipinos amidst the pandemic.
The governing bodies of these poor countries, even with all their efforts, are sometimes overwhelmed and undeniably need support to overcome their struggles. Even if it is their responsibility to provide these basic commodities to their citizens, they could not help their own because it is not feasible for many factors like the country's insufficient funds, piling up of debts and uneventful situations. Poor countries cannot face challenges alone so wealthy nations should help people by giving food and educational aids. This practice can be best exemplified by what happened in the Philippine's hard time during the strike of Typhoon Yolanda. Countries like Japan, America and others provided food, shelter and financial help to the affected people. It helped the Filipinos to stand and start again in life.
In conclusion, the help the poor nations that they could receive from wealthy nations can be a bridge to a stronger partnership. Alongside with the poor nation's leaders' responsibilitie s, struggles are more prominent and inevitable so more qualified wealthy nations should back them up.
Report