Teachers and Students > Debates

Should richer nations help poorer ones in their tertiary or secondary sector?

(1/4) > >>

Alpha:
Debates are no fun if everybody agrees with everybody. That is why I changed the title. :P

I hope there will be an opposing team and someone holding the balance on the extreme side. A real debate.  :)

So, which sector do you think is best?
Rule: There is no 50-50 option (no sitting on the fence :P).

We want to know which sector is best for investment and why.

$tyli$h Executive:
It depends on what "help" constitutes to. I think they should not help poorer nations directly. This is because poorer nations are often poor because they have corrupt Presidents who will eat all the aid they get from foreign nations.

However, real help can come through foreign investment especially in mining/drilling and agricultural sector.

Chingoo:
I agree with Stylish. Sadly, none of the richer countries would help poorer countries simply out of goodwill, so obviously the best option is investment in different sectors of the country like educational, archaeological, tourism, mining, agriculture, industry, etc. That actually makes sense for both countries to be involved in and reduces chances of corrupt governments exploiting the money.

Richer countries, however, when intervene in the political field of life in a poor country--as we can see--has detrimental effects for the most part. It may pave way for corrupt governments to remain established in their positions and, at the same time, make it harder for NGOs and private sectors to get investment from the foreign powers, who may actually hold the manpower and potential to make something big for the poor country.

Master_Key:
As said above to invest in different sectors. Considering mining and importing of raw products by richer countries. They can help out the most by making the technological advancement in the country from where they import products. Products like timber, silicon, and other materials widely found in developing countries or MEDCs and LEDCs. They can process these in the home country and import the final product with a value added. This act can actually harms HEDCs, their exports will be down. GDP may decline and more amount of money spent on importing goods.

Economist state that US is the strongest economy, China by 2015-2020, India by further half a decade/decade or so. This can be proven wrong as their only aspect is GDP. US's 95% of GDP is in debt, 14.3 trillion US Dollars are in debt with US owing china a massive amount. China is a developing country and still it has helped US. This may not be the case with bangladesh and other LEDCs, their NGOs are working very hard and all are on their track. Particularly, richer countries should help only when LEDCs are in need of that.

Alpha:
I changed the title and redirected the debate to a more precise stand.
Now, you may choose yours. :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page