Some people think the government should provide free housing, while others believe it is not the government’s responsibility. Discuss both views and give your opinion
Some people think the government should provide free housing, while others believe it is not the government’s responsibility. Discuss both views and give your opinion
There exists a contention posited by some individuals that the governments are responsible for distributing accommodation without charge to their inhabitants, while others argue that it is beyond their duty. This essay sheds light on why I believe that the validity of the given issue varies upon different backgrounds of residents.
On the one hand, regardless of roofless, destitute individuals being devoid of requisite resources to afford a shelter, the authorities are indeed responsible for supplying them with free housings. This stems from the fact that people in these cases, as having no fixed address for settling, seemingly have lower tolerance against scores of severe natural phenomena or even disasters, be it thunderstorm, deluge and prolonged heat, thus detrimentally undermining their well-being, resulting in higher death rate upon the society. Additionally, this could even exacerbate, since those homeless people often struggle in seeking occupations and hence burdened under financial constraints, doubled with potential psychological instability, are more likely to harbor ill intentions such as robbery, theft or even murder for assets, contributing to escalating the criminal activity levels.
However, with other normal population groups, the effort of providing costless accommodations should not be considered as the government’s responsibility. One compelling rationale is that while the national budget dedicated to constructing free buildings for such inhabitants with complete capability of affording appears to be worthless, there remains various pivotal aspects of life in need of being invested, be it education or healthcare system, that could help foster the development of the whole country. Further supporting this view is that over dependence might occur among the bulk of the population, since many of them regard purchasing a shelter as a target to dedicatedly perform at work. Given what they always crave for, these people might give up contributing wholeheartedly, leading to society forfeiting a robust labor force.
In conclusion, both sides hold their justifications. From my point of view, neither side should be considered more reasonable since the decision on whether or not the government should take responsibility for equipping dwellers with free housing needs to be based on their specific backgrounds.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"There exists a contention posited by some individuals" -> "Some individuals argue that"
Explanation: Simplifying the phrase to "Some individuals argue that" removes unnecessary complexity and enhances clarity, aligning better with academic style by avoiding passive voice and overly formal phrasing. -
"the governments are responsible for distributing accommodation without charge to their inhabitants" -> "governments should provide free accommodation to their citizens"
Explanation: Replacing "are responsible for distributing accommodation without charge" with "should provide free accommodation" clarifies the responsibility and action, making the sentence more direct and formal. -
"roofless, destitute individuals" -> "homeless individuals"
Explanation: "Roofless" is not a commonly used term in English; "homeless" is the standard term and more precise in this context. -
"devoid of requisite resources" -> "lacking essential resources"
Explanation: "Devoid of requisite resources" is overly formal and slightly awkward; "lacking essential resources" is more straightforward and maintains formality. -
"free housings" -> "free housing"
Explanation: "Housings" is not a standard term; "housing" is the correct noun form. -
"seemingly have lower tolerance against scores of severe natural phenomena or even disasters" -> "appear to have lower tolerance to severe natural phenomena and disasters"
Explanation: "Seemingly" is informal and vague; "appear to" is more precise and formal. Also, "scores of" is informal; "severe" is sufficient. -
"deluge and prolonged heat" -> "floods and heatwaves"
Explanation: "Deluge" and "prolonged heat" are less specific and less commonly used in formal writing; "floods" and "heatwaves" are more precise and commonly accepted terms. -
"detrimentally undermining their well-being" -> "adversely affecting their well-being"
Explanation: "Detrimentally undermining" is overly complex and less formal; "adversely affecting" is clearer and maintains formality. -
"burdened under financial constraints" -> "burdened by financial constraints"
Explanation: "Under" is incorrect in this context; "by" is the correct preposition for indicating the cause of a burden. -
"doubled with potential psychological instability" -> "compounded by potential psychological instability"
Explanation: "Doubled with" is incorrect; "compounded by" is the correct phrase for indicating the addition of factors that increase a problem. -
"are more likely to harbor ill intentions" -> "are more likely to harbor malicious intentions"
Explanation: "Ill intentions" is vague and informal; "malicious intentions" is more specific and appropriate for formal writing. -
"the effort of providing costless accommodations" -> "the provision of free accommodations"
Explanation: "The effort of providing" is awkward and verbose; "the provision of" is more direct and formal. -
"appears to be worthless" -> "seems unnecessary"
Explanation: "Appears to be worthless" is informal and imprecise; "seems unnecessary" is more appropriate for academic discourse. -
"over dependence might occur" -> "over-reliance might occur"
Explanation: "Over dependence" is not a standard term; "over-reliance" is the correct term for describing excessive dependence. -
"dedicatedly perform at work" -> "dedicate themselves to their work"
Explanation: "Dedicatedly perform at work" is awkward and unclear; "dedicate themselves to their work" is clearer and more formal. -
"giving up contributing wholeheartedly" -> "giving up their full commitment"
Explanation: "Giving up contributing wholeheartedly" is verbose and informal; "giving up their full commitment" is concise and maintains formality. -
"neither side should be considered more reasonable" -> "neither perspective is more justified"
Explanation: "Should be considered more reasonable" is awkward and informal; "is more justified" is more direct and formal.
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 on whether the government should provide free housing. The first paragraph discusses the perspective that the government has a responsibility to provide free housing for the homeless, citing the negative consequences of homelessness on individuals and society. The second paragraph presents the opposing view, arguing that providing free housing could divert resources from other essential areas like education and healthcare. However, the essay could improve by explicitly stating the two views more clearly in the introduction and summarizing them in the conclusion.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should ensure that both perspectives are clearly articulated in the introduction. Additionally, a more explicit summary of both views in the conclusion would reinforce the discussion and clarify the essay’s structure.
-
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The writer expresses a nuanced opinion, suggesting that the validity of the issue depends on the specific backgrounds of individuals. However, this position could be clearer. The phrase "neither side should be considered more reasonable" may confuse readers about the writer’s stance. The essay lacks a definitive position that aligns with the prompt’s request for the writer’s opinion.
- How to improve: The writer should clearly state their opinion in the introduction and reiterate it in the conclusion. Instead of suggesting that both sides are equally valid, the writer could specify under what circumstances they believe the government should or should not provide free housing, thus providing a more definitive stance.
-
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as the social implications of homelessness and the potential negative consequences of government-funded housing for those who can afford it. However, the development of these ideas is somewhat uneven. For instance, while the argument regarding the impact of homelessness on crime is compelling, it could be further supported with statistics or examples. Similarly, the argument against government responsibility could benefit from more elaboration on the potential consequences of over-dependence on government support.
- How to improve: To strengthen the essay, the writer should provide more concrete examples or data to support their claims. This could include referencing studies on homelessness or economic analyses of government spending. Additionally, expanding on each point with further explanation would enhance the depth of the argument.
-
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing the responsibilities of the government regarding housing. However, some sentences are convoluted and could lead to confusion about the main argument. For example, the phrase "the validity of the given issue varies upon different backgrounds of residents" is vague and could be misinterpreted.
- How to improve: The writer should aim for clarity and conciseness in their language. Simplifying complex sentences and ensuring that each point directly relates to the prompt will help maintain focus. Additionally, using clear topic sentences for each paragraph can guide the reader through the argument more effectively.
Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents relevant arguments, improvements in clarity, structure, and support for ideas would enhance the overall effectiveness and coherence of the response.
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, two body paragraphs discussing opposing views, and a conclusion. The introduction effectively sets the stage for the discussion by outlining the two perspectives. Each body paragraph addresses one viewpoint, which helps maintain clarity. However, the transition between ideas within paragraphs could be smoother. For example, the shift from discussing the responsibilities of the government to the implications of homelessness could benefit from clearer linking phrases to enhance the logical flow.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using more explicit transition phrases between sentences and ideas. For instance, phrases like "Furthermore," "In addition," or "Conversely," can help guide the reader through the argument more seamlessly. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea will help reinforce the logical structure.
-
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is crucial for coherence. Each paragraph focuses on a distinct viewpoint, which aids in clarity. However, the second body paragraph could be further divided into smaller sections to address the rationale and potential consequences separately, making it easier for the reader to digest complex ideas.
- How to improve: To improve paragraphing, consider breaking down longer paragraphs into smaller ones, especially when introducing new ideas or arguments. Each paragraph should ideally focus on a single idea or aspect of the argument. For example, the second body paragraph could be split into two: one discussing the rationale against government responsibility and another addressing the potential societal consequences of providing free housing.
-
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "However," to signal contrasting viewpoints. However, the range of cohesive devices used is somewhat limited, and the essay could benefit from more varied expressions to connect ideas. For instance, the use of synonyms or alternative phrases for "government" and "housing" could enhance cohesion and avoid repetition.
- How to improve: To diversify cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking words and phrases throughout the essay. For example, instead of repeatedly using "the government," consider using "authorities," "state," or "administration" to maintain reader interest. Additionally, using phrases like "This implies that," "Consequently," or "As a result" can help clarify the relationships between ideas and improve the overall flow of the essay.
In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of coherence and cohesion principles, there are opportunities for improvement in logical organization, paragraphing, and the use of cohesive devices. By implementing these suggestions, the essay can achieve a higher level of clarity and cohesiveness, potentially raising the band score in this criterion.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7
-
Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary, with terms such as "contention," "devoid," "requisite," and "detrimentally." These choices reflect an attempt to use sophisticated language. However, some phrases are overly complex or awkward, such as "the validity of the given issue varies upon different backgrounds of residents," which could be simplified for clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should aim to incorporate more varied synonyms and expressions that convey the same ideas without becoming convoluted. For instance, instead of "the validity of the given issue varies upon different backgrounds," a clearer phrase could be "the importance of this issue depends on the backgrounds of the residents."
-
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains instances of imprecise vocabulary usage. For example, the phrase "roofless, destitute individuals" could be more effectively expressed as "homeless individuals," which is clearer and more commonly understood. Additionally, "the authorities are indeed responsible for supplying them with free housings" contains a grammatical error; "housings" should be "housing," as "housing" is an uncountable noun.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on using vocabulary that is not only sophisticated but also appropriate for the context. Regularly consulting a thesaurus and practicing paraphrasing can help in selecting the most fitting words. For example, replacing "harbor ill intentions such as robbery, theft or even murder for assets" with "commit crimes such as theft or robbery" would enhance clarity.
-
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling in the essay is generally accurate, with no glaring errors. However, the use of "housings" instead of "housing" indicates a misunderstanding of noun forms, which can be considered a spelling-related issue in terms of correct word usage.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular proofreading practices and utilize spell-check tools. Additionally, familiarizing oneself with common noun forms and their usages can prevent similar errors in the future. Reading extensively can also help reinforce correct spelling and usage in context.
Overall, while the essay demonstrates a commendable level of lexical resource, focusing on clarity, precision, and correct usage will help elevate the score further.
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 commendable variety of sentence structures. For instance, the use of complex sentences is evident in phrases like "the authorities are indeed responsible for supplying them with free housings" and "the decision on whether or not the government should take responsibility for equipping dwellers with free housing needs to be based on their specific backgrounds." However, there are instances where the sentence structures could be more varied. For example, the phrase "the validity of the given issue varies upon different backgrounds of residents" could be rephrased for clarity and impact.
- How to improve: To enhance the diversity of sentence structures, consider incorporating more compound sentences and varying the lengths of sentences. For example, instead of consistently using long, complex sentences, mix in shorter, impactful sentences to emphasize key points. Additionally, using different introductory phrases and clauses can help create a more engaging flow.
-
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a generally good command of grammar and punctuation, but there are notable errors that detract from its overall clarity. For instance, the phrase "roofless, destitute individuals being devoid of requisite resources" is awkwardly constructed and could be simplified. Additionally, the term "housings" is incorrect; the correct term should be "housing" as it is an uncountable noun. Punctuation is mostly accurate, but there are instances where commas could enhance readability, such as before "since" in the phrase "since those homeless people often struggle."
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on the proper use of uncountable nouns and ensure that phrases are clear and concise. Regularly reviewing grammar rules, particularly those related to noun usage and sentence construction, can be beneficial. Additionally, practicing punctuation rules, especially regarding the use of commas in complex sentences, will help in creating clearer and more effective sentences.
Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of grammatical range and accuracy, focusing on diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical precision will enhance the overall quality and clarity of the writing.
Bài sửa mẫu
There exists a contention posited by some individuals that governments are responsible for providing accommodation without charge to their citizens, while others argue that it is beyond their duty. This essay sheds light on why I believe that the validity of the given issue varies based on the different backgrounds of residents.
On the one hand, regardless of roofless, destitute individuals being devoid of essential resources to afford shelter, the authorities are indeed responsible for supplying them with free housing. This stems from the fact that people in these cases, as they have no fixed address, seemingly have lower tolerance against severe natural phenomena or disasters, such as thunderstorms, floods, and prolonged heat, thus adversely affecting their well-being and resulting in a higher death rate in society. Additionally, this situation could even exacerbate, since those homeless individuals often struggle to seek employment and, hence, burdened by financial constraints, compounded by potential psychological instability, are more likely to harbor malicious intentions such as robbery, theft, or even murder for assets, contributing to escalating criminal activity levels.
However, for other normal population groups, the effort of providing free accommodations should not be considered the government’s responsibility. One compelling rationale is that while the national budget dedicated to constructing free housing for such inhabitants who are fully capable of affording it appears to be unnecessary, there are various pivotal aspects of life that require investment, such as education or the healthcare system, which could help foster the development of the whole country. Further supporting this view is that over-reliance might occur among the majority of the population, since many of them regard purchasing a shelter as a goal to dedicate themselves to their work. Given what they always crave, these people might give up their full commitment, leading to society forfeiting a robust labor force.
In conclusion, both sides hold their justifications. From my point of view, neither side should be considered more justified since the decision on whether or not the government should take responsibility for providing citizens with free housing needs to be based on their specific backgrounds.