Task 1
The chart below shows the percentage of people born in and outside of Australia living in cities,
towns, and rural areas in 1950 and 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the
main features of the graph and make comparisons where relevant.
Task 2: 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?
Sample:
Task 1
The bar charts compare Australian citizens in terms of their origins and geographical distribution in
two separate years
Overall, it is noticeable that a significant proportion of citizens of Australian origin and non-Australian
origin preferred moving to metropolises over the course of 60 years. We can also see that residing in
rural regions was more preferable among those originating from Australia
In 1950, nearly a half of people born in Australia live in cities compared to exactly 60% of citizens of
foreign origins. The figures for people living in rural areas were significantly lower, at about one-third
of Australian-born citizens and 40% for dwellers originating from other countries. Only a fifth of
Australian born and non-Australian origins preferred living in towns
Between 1950 and 2010, cities attracted more inhabitants whose origins from Australia and outside
the country, with more than 60% and 80% of city populations respectively. There were dramatic
drops in town and rural populations who were born in Australia, falling to nearly 15% in 2010.
Similarly, a merely 10% of individuals born outside Australia settled in rural areas, which fell eightfold
from 40% in 1950 to almost 5% in 2010
Task 2:
Financial aid is the prevalent form of support granted by affluent countries to underdeveloped ones,
but the efficiency of this aid in tackling poverty is being questioned. Some suggest promoting other
types of aid in stead of funding financially would be more efficient, and I completely advocate this
notion.
On the one hand, it is understandable why wealthy countries opt for financial incentives when it
comes to providing spontaneous support to poorer ones. The aid in form of money allows the
government of receiving countries to spend on major infrastructure including roads, hospitals and
schools, which are fundamental to any countries to escape the poverty. Besides, financial aids are
more likely to be efficient when a country in need is facing humanitarian calamities such as
earthquakes and its residents is facing shelter loss, shortage of necessities and lack of livelihood to
sustain life. However, providing help with purely form of money can only work in the short term, as it
has not dealt with the root cause of poverty
I believe that in the long run, the less developed countries need more non-financial aids to actually
lift themselves out of poverty. In this sense, more wealthy nations can help to transform the
outdated, less effective and vulnerable economy by providing experts and technology such as
cutting-edge machines and equipment. The underdeveloped heavily rely on agriculture with
outdated farming practices and lack of automation, so by receiving expertise knowledge and
technological aids, citizens in those less developed areas can sustain lives with a more stable
livelihood. Consequently, poorer countries can boost the economy without depending on funding
given by the more affluent.
In conclusion, despite temporary benefits of financial aid given to needy regions, I am of the opinion
that other forms of international support including expertise and technological transfer will be more
sustainable in reducing poverty
Although poorer countries usually receive financial aid from more
developed nations, such assistance does not
help eradicate poverty. Thus, it is believed that developed
countries should provide other types of help to their
underdeveloped and developing counterparts, with which I
completely agree.
Despite its impact on poorer countries’ economies, monetary
support is only a short-term solution and cannot help these
countries escape poverty. In some developing and underdeveloped
countries, corruption is among the serious problems which have
been existing for years. Even if rich nations provide financial
assistance to their poorer counterparts, the money may not reach
the right recipients, who are unfortunate people living on the
breadline. Furthermore, there are still some problems which stem
from poor management of government or administrative systems in
poor countries. Those problems could not be tackled by financial
aid since a country has no right to interfere with another country’s
internal affairs.
Since financial assistance could not contribute much to
the alleviation of poverty, developed countries should offer other
forms of support to their poorer counterparts. One way is for richer
countries to provide occupational courses to increase the level of
education in poorer countries. One of the root causes of poverty in
underdeveloped countries is the lack of education, which could be
solved by developed countries offering basic training courses for
employment in poor countries. Furthermore, providing proper
technical training could be another type of effective help for poor
countries. Thanks to the advanced technical understanding
provided by developed countries, poor countries can upgrade their
industries, enhance their global competitiveness, and therefore
eliminate poverty.
In conclusion, rather than giving direct financial support, I think
developed countries should share other resources, such as their
knowledge and understanding, with poorer countries and thus help
them curb poverty.
