It is argued that governments of wealthy countries should accept a duty to assist improvements in health, education and business which are crucial for poorer nations’ development. I strongly agree with this idea as underdeveloped countries do not have enough budget and also rich countries have ethical obligations.
To begin with, low-income countries often suffer from limited budgets. That is to say, many economically disadvantaged nations have a low GDP and therefore, have budget constraints which means they can not properly invest on developments. Encouraging mutual economic projects not only contributes to economic growth of wealthier countries, but also provide many job opportunities for the hosting country. For instance, USA yearly invests billions of dollars on various projects across the glob in developing or underdeveloped countries which help them to use cost effective labors to increase their production and also by hiring employees in those countries increase their salary. Hence, implementing such policies would bring mutual benefits and empower both economies.
Moreover, industrialized nations have moral obligations and should carry a burden in terms of eliminating poverty in underdeveloped countries. Many third-world nations are struggling with poverty, providing nutrition and healthcare for their citizens. While some international organizations participate in helping these nations, still wealthy countries should follow humanitarian activities trying to prevent a famine. For example, many African countries undergo drought yearly and rely on US aid to prevent hunger in their countries. Despite all the reasons mentioned, a huge pressure should not be held on first-world countries as they also struggle with competing with their rivals like China and they need to prioritize allocating budget for their own nation.
To conclude, my view is that poorer countries have limited budget and need help to empower their economy; also, rich countries have moral obligations to engage in humanitarian activities.