# data[].attributes.body
Q1:  International aid programmes do not actually work to reduce absolute poverty and do more harm than good to poor countries.

First, poverty is caused by national economic systems that block the incentives and opportunities of the poor to improve their lives for themselves, their neighbors and their country, and such a vicious cycle of poverty cannot be broken by an infusion of foreign capital. Some poor countries, such as Liberia, have received more than a billion dollars to tackle poverty and other problems, but governments still lack the ability to make policy reforms, such as educational development. It is clear that African governments, which take Western aid for granted, are not committed to economic reform but to distributing the money.

In addition, governments in these poor countries are likely to become more corrupt as International aid flows into them. As a result ,a  lot of international aid is spent by senior government officials, a large part of foreign aid has not contributed to Africa's self-improvement and development, but has only made life increasingly rich and luxurious for a small number of people.

Q2: Extractive institutions is reflected in depriving and squeezing the majority of people of the motivation and opportunities to improve their lives, thus leaving the whole society in a state of poverty.

International aid to Africa cannot solve Africa's economic problems, but will keep Africa in poverty. As loans are the main way for IMF and World Bank to issue aid funds, and extractive institutions in receiving countries have the highest right to distribute these funds, it is difficult for donors to control the real use of funds. The conditionality attached to aid money turned out to be a dead letter.
Since the recipient country ultimately has to pay back the loans in the form of taxes, the preferential loans end up being huge debts owed by taxpaying citizens rather than the government, resulting in an even greater gap between the rich and the poor.

Q3: Long-term development can be achieved through international assistance only when governments are stable, countries are free from corruption, and human rights, the rule of law and transparent information are guaranteed.

Q4: The  “golden thread” idea means using not only international aid but also international diplomatic relations to encourage reform in the many parts of the world that are still under the control of the extractive institutions. This implies the need to use financial and diplomatic clout to create space for inclusive institutions.

# data[].attributes.body
Q1:The effect of foreign aid in reducing absolute poverty is not so significant or the effect is temporary. For example, although a large amount of aid funds are injected into Africa, the local people are still in a state of poverty, because these aid agencies make the local people unwilling to pay labor to work, change the status, and create opportunities for development. Just want to wait for assistance. This cannot fundamentally solve the problem of poverty.

Q2:The internal system of these countries has caused international aid to deviate from its essence and goal. The effect of international aid cannot be achieved. The term refers to a system in which the poor are blocked from moving up the ladder so that the poor remain the poor, the exploited class. This "predatory" economic system, as we call it, impoverishes society by weakening the incentives and opportunities of the broad population.

Q3: A ‘golden thread’ of stable government, lack of corruption, human rights, the rule of law and transparent information.

Q4:Promoting golden thread means Foreign aid should not only be embodied in money, but also through diplomatic influence to change those corrupt and inefficient state institutions and promote their development and reform. Only in this way can the significance of international assistance be achieved, and only then can we achieve good global governance and give play to the positive impact of globalization.
Because it's not just the poor who are trapped in this system, entire societies condemn themselves to poverty by wasting vast amounts of potential talent and energy. The key to understanding and addressing world poverty is to recognize not only that poverty is created and sustained by oil extractors, but also why it occurs in the first place.

# data[].attributes.body
Q1: The UN's international aid programmes have not helped to reduce absolute poverty. That is to say, it could be argued that the benefits are very limited.
Because since 1950s, the idea that a great amount of money should be donated to the poor countries is prevalent, but the result is not so good. For example, millions of people have got rid of poverty, but it has little to do with foreign aids. Instead, because of its economic growth, Asian countries have got rid of poverty to large extent. At the same time, over a quarter of countries in sub-Saharan Africa are much poorer now than in 1960, and although the main factors keep countries in Africa poor  may be famines and civil wars, but a great deal of money donated to poor countries seems to have little impact on solving poverty.

Therefore, it seems that the aid programs given by the United Nations have made very limited tangible changes. Sovereign countries still have to rely on their own strengths and efforts to change poverty, and do not rely solely on international aid.

Q2: The extractive institutions mentioned in the author's article prevent the aspirations of poor people in some countries to have the same opportunities and chances, good health care, clean running water in their homes, and quality schools for their children. The article suggests that poverty is created and sustained by extractive institutions. It is a deterrent to economic growth in individual countries. The article argues that when aid is provided to governments that preside over extractive institutions, it is at best irrelevant and at worst completely counterproductive. This has a negative impact on both the poor and international aid, and should encourage reform in many parts of the world that remain under the control of extractive institutions.

Q3:
David Cameron mentioned "golden thread" as long-term development through aid only happens if there is a ‘golden thread’ of stable government, lack of corruption, human rights, the rule of law and transparent information.

Q4:
The 'golden threat' is a condition of globalization and global governance, with international aid working under the 'golden thread' of stable governments, lack of corruption, human rights, rule of law, and transparent information. This means using not only aid but also diplomatic relations to encourage reform in many parts of the world that are still controlled by extractive institutions. It means using financial and diplomatic clout, such as the substantial financial and diplomatic clout the UK has, to help create space for inclusive institutions to thrive. This can be a daunting task, but it is the surest way to make poverty history.

# data[].attributes.body
1.UN's international aid programs have not solved the problem of absolute poverty. Because many South Africans can't find jobs as easily as white people, and many of them are unwilling to go to work and prefer to wait for the government's help. Another point is the corruption of the government. Many donations may not be directly given to the poor and needy.

2.The economic obstacles they face are caused by a minority of elites and the monopoly of political power. But their aspirations are hindered. Because of racial discrimination, black people cannot have equal opportunities, but when they ask the government for help, it is irrelevant.

3.it is a strategy which contains stable government, lack of corruption, human rights, the rule of law and transparent information.

4.Promoting his golden thread means using not just aid but diplomatic relations to encourage reform in the many parts of the world that remain in the grip of extractive institutions.

Using financial and diplomatic clout (and Britain has plenty of both) to help create room for inclusive institutions to grow.

# data[].attributes.body
The UN's plans have not reduced absolute poverty. Millions of people around the world have been lifted out of poverty over the past six decades, but that has had little to do with international aid. Firstly, the money donated by the UN is probably being siphoned off by powerful people. Secondly the cash left over will only temporarily help the hungry and poor.

Q2: These agencies often have the power to receive donations directly from the UN. But the donations are often spent by the powerful people who control them rather than going to the poor. Impact: There is no significant economic growth in poor countries. Often the poor do not receive enough aid and the powerful get richer.
Q3: Stable government, lack of corruptions, human rights, the rule of laws and transparent information
Q4: With globalization the World Bank and International Management encourage developing countries to go through market reforms and radical changes through large loans. Many developing nations began to take steps to open their markets by removing tariffs and free up their economies.
The developed countries were able to invest in the developing nations, creating job opportunities for the poor people. developed countries could help developing countries to understand the importance of stable government,  and help them understand the drawbacks of their system rather than simply giving economic help, which is the benefit of globalization

# data[].attributes.headline
Q1: Do you think the UN's international aid programmes have helped to reduce absolute poverty? Can you find the answer to this question in 'The Spectator' article text?Q2: What do the authors mean by “extractive institutions”?  What do these "extractive institutions" do to individual states economic growth and how does this affect the poor and the impact of  international aid? Q3: What is the “golden thread” as the authors of this article call it? Q4: How is this “golden thread” idea relate to globalisation and global governance?

# data[].attributes.subject
Q1: Do you think the UN's international aid programmes have helped to reduce absolute poverty? Can you find the answer to this question in 'The Spectator' article text?Q2: What do the authors mean by “extractive institutions”?  What do these "extractive institutions" do to individual states economic growth and how does this affect the poor and the impact of  international aid? Q3: What is the “golden thread” as the authors of this article call it? Q4: How is this “golden thread” idea relate to globalisation and global governance?