The pie charts compare the proportion of individuals employed across three sectors, including
manufacturing, sales, and services in two town in 1960 and 2010.
Overall, Town A experienced a dramatic rise in the services sector contrasting with Town B,
where manufacturing remained the key sector. Both towns saw increases in the proportions of
people working services, but the impact of these changes varied.
In Town A, 40% of people were employed in the manufacturing industry, while services and
sales had almost identical percentages of workers at 30% and 29%, respectively. By 2010, the
share of people working in services had seen exponenial growth, reaching 62%, which was
associated with falls in sales and manufacturing in Town A.
In Town B, manufacturing provided 70% of employment, which declined to 53% by 2010
however; remained the largest figure. When it comes to sales and services, they followed
similar trends. While the proportion of people working in sales increased slightly to reach 22%,
services saw a substantial increase reaching 25%.
Rich countries often give money to poorer countries, but it does not solve poverty. Therefore,
developed countries should give other types of help to poorer countries rather than financial
aid. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
There is a view that offering financial aid to underdeveloped countries cannot alleviate poverty.
Therefore, some people think that instead of providing monetary support, rich countries should
find other ways to assist poorer countries. I completely agree with this notion for two main
reasons.
To commence with, education can be a viable solution to the ever-increasing issues of poverty.
Many nations suffer from a lack of skilled employees who can fill skill gap in their communities.
There is a deficiency of experts in fields such as education, engineering, science, and other
essential areas, which can be a significant obstacle to a country’s development. To tackle this
issue, rich countries should offer complimentary training and education to local citizens to help
them acquire the necessary skills, which can later used to contribute to national progress. In
most underprivilleged countries, skilled people emigrate to search for better job opportunities,
resulting in significant brain drain. Therefore, developed countries should help their less
developed counterparts establish favorable conditions for personal growth and career
advancement, which can persuade these individuals to remain in their home country and aiding
in its development.
Moreover, rather than providing financial support, affluent countries should help these
undeveloped countries establish infrastructure. In many countries, dishonest officials misuse
allocated international aid and abusing their responsibilities. To avoid this, rich countries should
help the less developed ones to improve public infrastructure, including the transport system,
health system amenities, and security. This helps to improve the reputation of these countries
on the global stage, attracting more attention from private investors. To illustrate that, by
reconstructing historical monuments and buildings, they can spark tourists interest in these
sites. As a consequence, the boom of tourists can revitalize the local economy by creating job
opportunities and bringing in the flow of international curenncy.
In conclusion, I think that the effect of financial support is short-lived, and more efficient
solutions should be offered to deal with poverty. Education and improving public infrastructure
are two of these solutions, which can help provide a knowledgeable workforce for impoverished
countries as well as boost the local economy by improving its appeal for foreign investment and
tourism.