The government in many countries is spending a lot of money on fast food restaurants. Is this a positive or negative development?

The government in many countries is spending a lot of money on fast food restaurants.
Is this a positive or negative development?

It is common to see the government in many countries spending a lot of money on restaurants which serve fast food. In my opinion, such a trend is more disadvantageous than advantageous due to a number of reasons which will be presented in the essay below.

Regarding the advantageous effects, there are two that are the most noticeable. To begin with, the amount of money contributed to the national budget stands a chance to rise, addressing many societal problems. This is on the grounds that fast food companies, namely McDonald’s or KFC, can generate job opportunities and contribute to government coffers, triggering not only local unemployment but also poverty issues to decline. In addition to this, consumers can easily find time-efficient meals. By virtue of various menu options they can have without the need for grocery shopping or dishwashing, those leading hectic lifestyles can save plenty of time, and there is a strong likelihood that their quality of life can be enhanced as a result.

However, such advantages could be outweighed by the following disadvantages. One of them is the huge burden both patients and society may face. More specifically, hospitals or medical centers would be overcrowded, which is very likely to worsen shortage of resources in healthcare facilities receiving modest government funding, and in the worst scenario, affect the health ministry and social welfare. Another downside is that human beings may suffer from multiple health threats that can hurt their immune systems . This could be exemplified by the fact that pizzas, hamburgers or other unhealthy dishes, scientifically proven to serve as the main cause of diet-related diseases, such as hypertension, obesity as well as diabetes, can hurt people’s work productivity and life expectancy as a consequence.

In conclusion, many positive impacts can be seen when this fact takes place. However, its negative influences are much greater, from my point of view

---

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "It is common to see" -> "It is prevalent to observe"
   Explanation: "It is prevalent to observe" uses more formal language and avoids the colloquial tone of "common to see," enhancing the academic tone of the essay.

2. "spending a lot of money" -> "expenditure on"
   Explanation: "Expenditure on" is a more precise and formal term that avoids the colloquial expression "a lot of money," aligning better with academic style.

3. "due to a number of reasons" -> "owing to several reasons"
   Explanation: "Owing to several reasons" is a more formal expression that enhances the academic tone and avoids the vagueness of "a number of reasons."

4. "the most noticeable" -> "the most significant"
   Explanation: "The most significant" is a more precise and formal term than "the most noticeable," which is somewhat vague and less formal.

5. "stands a chance to rise" -> "may increase"
   Explanation: "May increase" is a more direct and formal way to express potential changes in the budget, avoiding the awkward construction "stands a chance to rise."

6. "fast food companies, namely McDonald’s or KFC" -> "fast-food chains such as McDonald’s and KFC"
   Explanation: "Fast-food chains such as" is more specific and formal than "fast food companies, namely," and avoids the informal use of "namely" in this context.

7. "triggering not only local unemployment but also poverty issues to decline" -> "resulting in a reduction in both local unemployment and poverty"
   Explanation: "Resulting in a reduction in both local unemployment and poverty" is more precise and formal, avoiding the awkward construction "triggering not only local unemployment but also poverty issues to decline."

8. "those leading hectic lifestyles" -> "individuals with hectic lifestyles"
   Explanation: "Individuals with hectic lifestyles" is more formal and precise than "those leading hectic lifestyles," which is somewhat informal and vague.

9. "there is a strong likelihood that their quality of life can be enhanced" -> "there is a strong likelihood that their quality of life will improve"
   Explanation: "Will improve" is more direct and formal than "can be enhanced," aligning better with academic style.

10. "huge burden both patients and society may face" -> "significant burden that patients and society may face"
    Explanation: "Significant burden that" is more formal and precise than "huge burden both," which is somewhat informal and imprecise.

11. "hospitals or medical centers would be overcrowded" -> "hospitals and medical centers may become overcrowded"
    Explanation: "May become overcrowded" is more formal and avoids the assumption implied by "would be," which is less speculative and more assertive than necessary in academic writing.

12. "affect the health ministry and social welfare" -> "impact the health ministry and social welfare"
    Explanation: "Impact" is a more formal synonym for "affect," enhancing the academic tone of the sentence.

13. "human beings may suffer from multiple health threats" -> "individuals may be exposed to various health risks"
    Explanation: "Individuals may be exposed to various health risks" is more precise and formal than "human beings may suffer from multiple health threats," which is somewhat vague and informal.

14. "can hurt people’s work productivity and life expectancy" -> "can negatively impact individuals’ work productivity and life expectancy"
    Explanation: "Negatively impact" is a more precise and formal expression than "can hurt," which is too colloquial for academic writing.

15. "from my point of view" -> "in my opinion"
    Explanation: "In my opinion" is a more formal expression than "from my point of view," which is slightly less formal and more conversational.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both sides of the argument regarding government spending on fast food restaurants. The writer presents a clear opinion that this trend is more disadvantageous than advantageous. The advantages discussed include increased job opportunities and convenience for consumers, while the disadvantages focus on health-related issues and the strain on healthcare resources. However, the essay could benefit from a more explicit acknowledgment of the prompt’s request to evaluate whether this development is positive or negative, as it leans heavily towards the negative without fully exploring the implications of the advantages.
  • How to improve: To improve, the writer should ensure that both sides of the argument are presented with equal depth. This could involve providing more specific examples or statistics to support the advantages mentioned, thereby allowing for a more balanced discussion before concluding with a strong stance.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position throughout, stating that the negative aspects outweigh the positive ones. The introduction sets the tone for this stance, and the conclusion reiterates it effectively. However, the transition between the advantages and disadvantages could be smoother, as the abrupt shift may confuse readers about the overall argument.
  • How to improve: To enhance clarity, the writer could use transitional phrases to guide the reader through the argument. For example, phrases like "While there are some benefits," or "Despite these advantages," can help signal the shift from positive to negative aspects, reinforcing the writer’s position.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, particularly regarding the disadvantages of fast food consumption. The points about healthcare burdens and diet-related diseases are relevant and well-supported with examples. However, the advantages could be further developed. For instance, the mention of job creation is a strong point but lacks specific data or examples that would enhance its credibility and impact.
  • How to improve: To improve the development of ideas, the writer should aim to provide more detailed examples and evidence for both advantages and disadvantages. Including statistics or studies that highlight the economic impact of fast food jobs or the prevalence of diet-related diseases would strengthen the argument and provide a more robust discussion.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the implications of government spending on fast food. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly focused. For instance, while the mention of job creation is relevant, the essay could delve deeper into how this relates specifically to government spending rather than just the existence of fast food restaurants.
  • How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should consistently link each point back to the central question of whether government spending on fast food is a positive or negative development. This can be achieved by explicitly stating how each point contributes to the overall argument, ensuring that every idea presented is directly relevant to the prompt.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the task and presents a well-structured argument. By addressing the suggested areas for improvement, the writer can further enhance the clarity and depth of their 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, beginning with an introduction that outlines the writer’s stance. The body paragraphs are organized into advantages and disadvantages, which helps the reader follow the argument. However, the transition between the advantages and disadvantages could be smoother. For instance, the phrase "However, such advantages could be outweighed by the following disadvantages" serves as a transition but feels somewhat abrupt. The essay effectively introduces each point, but the logical flow could be enhanced by more explicit connections between ideas.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases that not only signal a shift in perspective but also summarize the preceding argument. For example, after discussing the advantages, you might add a sentence that briefly reiterates the importance of those advantages before introducing the disadvantages. This would create a more cohesive flow between sections.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively, with a clear separation between the introduction, advantages, disadvantages, and conclusion. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument, which aids in readability. However, the second body paragraph could be split into two separate paragraphs: one focusing on the societal burden and another on health issues. This would allow for a more in-depth exploration of each disadvantage and improve clarity.
  • How to improve: Consider breaking down complex ideas into separate paragraphs. For example, when discussing the societal burden and health threats, each point could be given its own paragraph. This would not only enhance clarity but also allow for a more thorough examination of each point, making the argument more persuasive.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay employs a variety of cohesive devices, such as "to begin with," "in addition to this," and "however," which help to connect ideas and indicate relationships between them. However, the range of cohesive devices used is somewhat limited, and there are instances where repetition occurs (e.g., "this could be exemplified by the fact that"). While the devices used are effective, they could be more varied to enhance the overall cohesion of the essay.
  • How to improve: To diversify cohesive devices, consider incorporating more synonyms and alternative phrases. For example, instead of repeatedly using "this could be exemplified by the fact that," you might use "for instance," "such as," or "to illustrate." Additionally, using more complex cohesive devices, such as "in contrast" or "consequently," can help to clarify relationships between ideas and improve the overall flow of the essay.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of coherence and cohesion principles, implementing the suggested improvements could elevate the score further by enhancing logical flow, paragraph structure, and the variety of cohesive devices used.

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 like "disadvantageous," "societal problems," "time-efficient meals," and "diet-related diseases." These choices reflect an understanding of the topic and the ability to express complex ideas. However, some phrases are somewhat repetitive, such as "government funding" and "health threats," which could be varied to enhance the lexical range further.
  • How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate more synonyms and varied expressions. For example, instead of repeating "government funding," alternatives like "public investment" or "state resources" could be used. Additionally, using more sophisticated vocabulary related to health and economics could elevate the essay, such as "nutritional deficiencies" instead of "unhealthy dishes."

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are instances of imprecise usage. For example, the phrase "triggering not only local unemployment but also poverty issues to decline" is awkward and unclear. The intended meaning seems to be that job creation could alleviate poverty, but the phrasing obscures this. Similarly, "the huge burden both patients and society may face" could be more clearly articulated.
  • How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on clarity in expression. Revising sentences for clarity and ensuring that the vocabulary accurately conveys the intended meaning is crucial. For instance, rephrasing the earlier example to "creating jobs that could help reduce poverty levels" would clarify the message. Additionally, using more specific terms related to the discussion, such as "economic strain" instead of "burden," could improve precision.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a high level of spelling accuracy, with no noticeable errors in the text. Words such as "advantageous," "overcrowded," and "exemplified" are spelled correctly, which contributes positively to the overall impression of the writing.
  • How to improve: While spelling is accurate, the writer should maintain this standard by proofreading their work to catch any potential errors in future essays. Engaging in regular spelling practice, especially with more complex vocabulary, can also help reinforce this skill. Additionally, using tools like spell checkers can provide an extra layer of assurance before submission.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid command of vocabulary with room for improvement in range, precision, and continued attention to spelling. By diversifying word choice, enhancing clarity, and maintaining spelling accuracy, the writer can work towards achieving a higher band score in the Lexical Resource 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 variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and some compound sentences. For instance, phrases such as "the amount of money contributed to the national budget stands a chance to rise" and "this could be exemplified by the fact that pizzas, hamburgers or other unhealthy dishes" show an attempt to use more sophisticated grammatical forms. However, there is some repetition in structure, particularly in the use of introductory phrases like "to begin with" and "in addition to this," which could be varied further.
  • How to improve: To enhance the diversity of sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more varied sentence openings and use different conjunctions or transition phrases. For example, instead of repeatedly using "to begin with," the writer might use "firstly," "initially," or "one key point is." Additionally, integrating more passive voice constructions or conditional sentences could add complexity to the writing.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains good grammatical accuracy, but there are some errors that affect clarity. For example, the phrase "triggering not only local unemployment but also poverty issues to decline" is awkwardly constructed and could be misinterpreted. Furthermore, there are punctuation issues, such as the lack of a comma before "which is very likely to worsen" in the sentence discussing overcrowded hospitals, which could lead to confusion regarding the sentence structure. Additionally, the phrase "human beings may suffer from multiple health threats that can hurt their immune systems" could be more concise and impactful.
  • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on refining sentence constructions for clarity. For instance, the problematic phrase could be restructured to "triggering a decline in local unemployment and poverty issues." Additionally, reviewing punctuation rules, particularly regarding clauses and introductory phrases, would help enhance clarity. Regular practice with grammar exercises and seeking feedback on sentence structure can also be beneficial.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a commendable level of grammatical range and accuracy, attention to sentence variety and grammatical precision will further elevate the writing quality.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is common to see the government in many countries spending a lot of money on restaurants that serve fast food. In my opinion, such a trend is more disadvantageous than advantageous due to several reasons which will be presented in the essay below.

Regarding the advantageous effects, there are two that are the most significant. To begin with, the amount of money contributed to the national budget stands a chance to rise, addressing many societal problems. This is owing to the fact that fast food companies, namely McDonald’s and KFC, can generate job opportunities and contribute to government coffers, resulting in a reduction in both local unemployment and poverty issues. In addition to this, consumers can easily find time-efficient meals. By virtue of various menu options they can have without the need for grocery shopping or dishwashing, individuals with hectic lifestyles can save plenty of time, and there is a strong likelihood that their quality of life will improve as a result.

However, such advantages could be outweighed by the following disadvantages. One of them is the significant burden that patients and society may face. More specifically, hospitals and medical centers may become overcrowded, which is very likely to worsen the shortage of resources in healthcare facilities receiving modest government funding, and in the worst scenario, impact the health ministry and social welfare. Another downside is that individuals may be exposed to various health risks that can hurt their immune systems. This could be exemplified by the fact that pizzas, hamburgers, or other unhealthy dishes, scientifically proven to serve as the main cause of diet-related diseases, such as hypertension, obesity, and diabetes, can negatively impact individuals’ work productivity and life expectancy as a consequence.

In conclusion, many positive impacts can be seen when this fact takes place. However, its negative influences are much greater, in my opinion.