In many countries, a small number of people earn extremely high salaries. Some people believe that this is good for the country, but others think that governments should not allow salaries above a certain level. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

In many countries, a small number of people earn extremely high salaries. Some people believe that this is good for the country, but others think that governments should not allow salaries above a certain level.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Income disparities has always been a growing concern in today’s society. While some people argue that the extreme rich can benefit country’s economic, others think that a ceiling for income should be implemented. In my opinion, even though I am not fully convinced by how the extremely high earners can benefit social welfare, I think it is extremely hard, if not impossible to implement a limitation in salaries.

On the one hand, it is unsure how high salaries achiever contribute to the country welfare, especially when it is a small number of the total population. In any case, this worsen the income inequality and widen the gap between the rich and the poor, making it harder for those in deprived condition to improve their wages.

One can argue that the extreme rich can support the country by funding innovation ideas, research experiments and charity organizations. While to an extent, this idea stands correct, it is still irrelevant to income inequality and social oppression. Moreover, the said arguments are not compulsory but rather voluntarily. Therefore, the contribution to society from those who earn extremely high wages in the form of monetary value is very vague and uncertain.

On another hand, I believe that it is extremely hard, if not nearly impossible to implement some sort of salary ceiling on people. I believe that people could and should earn a fair amount of salary depending on their ability and hard work. It is unfair to deprive such opportunity in society as it can demotivate and diminishing people to strive for excellence. Not to mention it is extremely hard to define a suitable amount of salary ceiling. How to define the accurate top salaries that one can or cannot earn is a question hard to solve.

Additionally, such law once bypass can create social oppression and force people to exploit loopholes to avoid penalties. I think, in a way, government has already implemented the salaries ceiling by the amount of income tax subjected to different take home salaries. However, people still try and find illegal ways to avoid this type of tax, through different methods such as laundering money or transferring salaries to different bank accounts overseas. Thus, creating another layer to ban people from earning what within their abilities will only result in people trying to fight against the system.

In conclusion, I contend that government should not implement the salaries ceiling as it is unfair and impossible to achieve. However, it is also worth mentioning that the government should find ways to combat against income disparities and look for solutions on how the extremely high earners can contribute to the society.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "Income disparities has" -> "Income disparities have"
   Explanation: The subject "disparities" is plural, requiring the plural form "have" to maintain grammatical accuracy.

2. "the extreme rich" -> "the extremely wealthy"
   Explanation: "The extreme rich" is an awkward and informal construction. "The extremely wealthy" is more precise and formal, fitting the academic style better.

3. "benefit country’s economic" -> "benefit the country’s economy"
   Explanation: "Country’s economic" is grammatically incorrect. "The country’s economy" is the correct phrase, and "benefit" should be followed by "the economy" to maintain grammatical correctness.

4. "a ceiling for income should be implemented" -> "a ceiling on income should be implemented"
   Explanation: "For" is incorrectly used here; "on" is the correct preposition to use with "ceiling" in this context, indicating a limit on income.

5. "high salaries achiever" -> "high-income earners"
   Explanation: "High salaries achiever" is awkward and unclear. "High-income earners" is the standard term used in formal writing to refer to individuals with high incomes.

6. "this worsen the income inequality" -> "this exacerbates income inequality"
   Explanation: "Worsen" is not the correct verb form here; "exacerbates" is the appropriate term to describe the increase in severity or degree of a problem like income inequality.

7. "deprived condition" -> "disadvantaged condition"
   Explanation: "Deprived condition" is vague and informal. "Disadvantaged condition" is more precise and appropriate for academic writing, clearly indicating a state of disadvantage.

8. "the said arguments are not compulsory but rather voluntarily" -> "these arguments are not mandatory but rather voluntary"
   Explanation: "The said arguments" is informal and unclear. "These arguments" is more direct and appropriate, and "mandatory" and "voluntary" are more precise terms than "compulsory" and "voluntary" in this context.

9. "people could and should earn a fair amount of salary" -> "individuals should be able to earn a fair salary"
   Explanation: "People could and should" is redundant and informal. "Individuals should be able to" is more formal and avoids redundancy, and "a fair salary" is more concise than "a fair amount of salary."

10. "deprive such opportunity" -> "deprive individuals of such opportunities"
    Explanation: "Deprive such opportunity" is grammatically incorrect and unclear. "Deprive individuals of such opportunities" corrects the grammatical error and clarifies the meaning.

11. "diminishing people to strive for excellence" -> "discourage people from striving for excellence"
    Explanation: "Diminishing people to strive" is awkward and incorrect. "Discourage people from striving" is grammatically correct and clearer, conveying the intended meaning effectively.

12. "define the accurate top salaries" -> "determine the appropriate maximum salaries"
    Explanation: "Define the accurate top salaries" is awkward and unclear. "Determine the appropriate maximum salaries" is more precise and formal, fitting the context better.

13. "bypass can create" -> "bypassing can create"
    Explanation: "Bypass can" is grammatically incorrect. "Bypassing can" corrects the verb form to match the gerund form required in this context.

14. "look for solutions on how the extremely high earners can contribute to the society" -> "seek solutions to enable the extremely high earners to contribute to society"
    Explanation: "Look for solutions on how" is informal and awkward. "Seek solutions to enable" is more formal and precise, improving the flow and clarity of the sentence.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay addresses both views regarding high salaries, presenting arguments for and against the idea of implementing a salary ceiling. The author discusses the potential benefits of high earners to the economy, such as funding innovation and charities, while also acknowledging the negative impact of income inequality. However, the discussion could be more balanced, as the arguments for the benefits of high salaries are less developed compared to the counterarguments.
  • How to improve: To enhance the response, the author should provide more specific examples and evidence supporting the positive contributions of high earners. This could include statistics on charitable donations or economic growth linked to high-income individuals. Additionally, ensuring that both sides of the argument are equally explored will create a more comprehensive discussion.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear personal opinion against implementing a salary ceiling, stating that it is unfair and impractical. However, there are moments where the position could be more firmly articulated, particularly in the introduction and conclusion. The phrase "even though I am not fully convinced" introduces ambiguity about the author’s stance on the benefits of high earners, which could confuse readers regarding the overall position.
  • How to improve: Strengthening the introduction and conclusion by clearly stating the author’s position without qualifiers would improve clarity. For instance, the author could assert their opinion more decisively from the outset and reiterate it strongly in the conclusion, summarizing the key reasons for their stance.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as the potential benefits of high earners and the challenges of implementing a salary ceiling. However, some points lack depth and supporting evidence. For example, the argument about the difficulty of defining a salary ceiling is mentioned but not elaborated upon with concrete examples or potential consequences of such a policy.
  • How to improve: To improve the development of ideas, the author should aim to elaborate on key points with specific examples, statistics, or real-world scenarios. For instance, discussing countries that have attempted to implement salary caps and the outcomes of those policies could provide valuable context and strengthen the argument.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the issue of high salaries and the debate surrounding them. However, there are moments where the discussion veers slightly off course, particularly when addressing the methods people might use to evade taxes. While this point is relevant to the broader discussion of income inequality, it could be more tightly connected to the main argument about salary ceilings.
  • How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that all points made directly relate back to the central question of whether a salary ceiling should be implemented. It may be helpful to outline the main points before writing to ensure that all arguments are relevant and contribute to the overall discussion.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a clear stance, improvements can be made in the depth of argumentation, clarity of position, and relevance of supporting details. By addressing these areas, the author can aim for a higher band score in the Task Response criteria.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

• Organize Information Logically:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear structure, with an introduction, body paragraphs discussing both views, and a conclusion. The arguments are generally well-organized, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the topic. For example, the first body paragraph addresses the negative impacts of high salaries on income inequality, while the second body paragraph discusses the challenges of implementing a salary ceiling. However, the logical flow could be improved, as some transitions between ideas are abrupt, making it harder for the reader to follow the progression of thoughts.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences that outline the main idea of each paragraph. Additionally, employing transitional phrases such as "Furthermore," "In contrast," or "On the other hand" at the beginning of paragraphs can help guide the reader through the argumentation more smoothly.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which aids in readability. Each paragraph generally contains a single main idea, but some paragraphs are quite dense, which can obscure the main points. For instance, the second body paragraph discusses multiple ideas about the challenges of implementing a salary ceiling without clearly delineating them, which may confuse the reader.
  • How to improve: To improve paragraphing, ensure that each paragraph contains a single main idea supported by relevant examples or explanations. Consider breaking down complex ideas into separate paragraphs to avoid overwhelming the reader. For example, the discussion about the challenges of defining a salary ceiling could be split into two paragraphs: one focusing on the difficulty of setting a ceiling and another on the consequences of attempting to enforce it.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "On another hand," which help to signal shifts in perspective. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between ideas could be made clearer. For example, the transition from discussing the contributions of high earners to the challenges of implementing a salary ceiling lacks a cohesive link, making the argument feel disjointed.
  • How to improve: To diversify and effectively use cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases. For instance, use "Additionally," "Consequently," or "In contrast" to connect ideas more fluidly. Furthermore, consider using pronouns or synonyms to refer back to previously mentioned concepts, which can help maintain coherence throughout the essay.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents coherent arguments, enhancing the logical flow, refining paragraph structure, and diversifying cohesive devices will contribute to a stronger performance in the Coherence and Cohesion criteria.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

• Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a fair range of vocabulary, with terms such as "income disparities," "economic," "social welfare," and "innovation ideas." However, there are instances where the vocabulary could be more varied or sophisticated. For example, phrases like "extreme rich" and "widen the gap" are somewhat repetitive and could benefit from more nuanced alternatives such as "ultra-wealthy" or "exacerbate the divide."
  • How to improve: To enhance lexical variety, the writer should aim to incorporate synonyms and more advanced vocabulary. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "extremely high earners," alternatives like "high-income individuals" or "affluent individuals" could be employed. Additionally, utilizing idiomatic expressions or collocations related to wealth and income could enrich the essay’s language.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay contains some imprecise vocabulary choices that detract from clarity. For example, the phrase "the extreme rich can benefit country’s economic" lacks grammatical accuracy and should be "the extremely wealthy can benefit the country’s economy." Similarly, "this worsen the income inequality" should be corrected to "this worsens income inequality."
  • How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on grammatical structures and ensure that phrases are complete and contextually appropriate. Regular practice with grammar exercises and reading high-quality essays can help in recognizing and correcting these issues. Additionally, using tools like thesauruses can assist in finding more precise words that fit the context better.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "achiever" (should be "achievers"), "diminishing" (should be "diminish"), and "take home salaries" (should be "take-home salaries"). These errors can disrupt the flow of reading and detract from the overall impression of the essay.
  • How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should implement a proofreading strategy. This could include reading the essay aloud to catch errors, using spell-check tools, or writing practice essays and focusing on spelling during the revision process. Additionally, maintaining a personal list of commonly misspelled words can be beneficial for ongoing improvement.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a satisfactory level of lexical resource, there are clear areas for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance their overall score in this criterion.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

• Use a Wide Range of Structures:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, the use of phrases like "even though I am not fully convinced" and "while some people argue" showcases the writer’s ability to employ subordinating clauses effectively. However, there are instances of repetitive structures, such as starting several sentences with "I believe" or "it is," which can detract from the overall variety. Additionally, the use of passive voice is limited, which could enhance the complexity of the writing.
  • How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more varied sentence openings and use different grammatical forms, such as participial phrases or conditional clauses. For example, instead of repeatedly using "I believe," the writer could start sentences with phrases like "Considering the implications of high salaries," or "If a salary ceiling were imposed, it could lead to…". This would not only enhance the variety but also engage the reader more effectively.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues. For instance, "Income disparities has always been" should be "Income disparities have always been," indicating a subject-verb agreement error. Additionally, phrases like "the extreme rich can benefit country’s economic" are awkward and grammatically incorrect; it should read "the extreme rich can benefit the country’s economy." There are also punctuation errors, such as missing commas in complex sentences, which can lead to run-on sentences and affect clarity.
  • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement, ensuring that singular and plural forms match correctly. Regularly reviewing basic grammar rules and practicing with exercises can help solidify these concepts. For punctuation, the writer should pay attention to the use of commas in complex sentences, especially before conjunctions and after introductory phrases. Reading the essay aloud can help identify areas where pauses are needed, indicating where commas should be placed for better clarity.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents arguments clearly, focusing on grammatical accuracy and diversifying sentence structures will enhance the overall quality and coherence of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

Income disparities have always been a growing concern in today’s society. While some people argue that the extremely wealthy can benefit the country’s economy, others think that a ceiling on income should be implemented. In my opinion, even though I am not fully convinced by how the extremely high earners can benefit social welfare, I think it is extremely hard, if not impossible, to implement a limitation on salaries.

On the one hand, it is uncertain how high salary achievers contribute to the country’s welfare, especially when they represent a small number of the total population. In any case, this exacerbates income inequality and widens the gap between the rich and the poor, making it harder for those in disadvantaged conditions to improve their wages.

One can argue that the extremely wealthy can support the country by funding innovative ideas, research experiments, and charity organizations. While to an extent, this idea stands correct, it is still irrelevant to income inequality and social oppression. Moreover, the said arguments are not mandatory but rather voluntary. Therefore, the contribution to society from those who earn extremely high wages in the form of monetary value is very vague and uncertain.

On the other hand, I believe that it is extremely hard, if not nearly impossible, to implement some sort of salary ceiling on people. I believe that individuals should be able to earn a fair salary depending on their ability and hard work. It is unfair to deprive such opportunities in society, as it can demotivate and discourage people from striving for excellence. Not to mention, it is extremely hard to define a suitable amount for a salary ceiling. How to determine the appropriate maximum salaries that one can or cannot earn is a question hard to solve.

Additionally, such a law, once bypassed, can create social oppression and force people to exploit loopholes to avoid penalties. I think, in a way, the government has already implemented a salary ceiling by the amount of income tax subjected to different take-home salaries. However, people still try to find illegal ways to avoid this type of tax, through different methods such as laundering money or transferring salaries to different bank accounts overseas. Thus, creating another layer to ban people from earning what is within their abilities will only result in people trying to fight against the system.

In conclusion, I contend that the government should not implement a salary ceiling, as it is unfair and impossible to achieve. However, it is also worth mentioning that the government should seek solutions to enable the extremely high earners to contribute to society.