Some people believe that improving education in remote regions such as Papua is the most effective way to reduce poverty, while others think that economic investment is more important.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Whilst some people think that it is beneficial to invest in the economic sector to alleviate poverty in isolated places such as Papua, I believe that thriving in education is more fundamental.
Financial investment can be considered a suitable way to decrease poverty in a short-term period. By sending more money to the remote areas, the locals can buy things to accommodate their daily needs. However, after spending the money in some days or weeks, people usually go back to their status-quo of deprivation. For example, after 21 years of special autonomy funds, Papua is still poor. That is why the economic approach is not ideal.
I believe that education is the best long-term solution to tackle financial problems. The government can invest more in the school system by building standardized school facilities and funding the students, so they can be educated and trained to be competent to do some professions which can generate money. For instance, the government can give scholarships for some qualified students to study medicine, so after graduating, they can work and make some money. With education, the native can have a better economy.
To sum up, although financial investment may be accepted to help the poor for some time, I believe that for a long-run solution, funding and improvement on education should be taken seriously.
Posting Komentar
Posting Komentar