Writing Feedback / Rapid developement of internet technology influence people in numerous areas for the better [2]

The Internet is probably the most significant invention of the last 30 years. Without it, our lives would be completely different.
To what extent do you agree or disagree!

In the last three decades, the internet most importantly considered as an outstanding invention. Becoming addicted to the internet and being a criminal person, are the negative effects of using the internet. However, rapidly developing internet technology influence people in pervaded areas such as communication, education, and employment, I would agree with this notion because the internet changes the human life to be better.

Opponents of the appearance of internet argue against that technology for several reasons. Firstly, they assume that certain people may be an addict with the internet. For example, children spend all their time suffering the internet in order to play numerous online games. It is difficult to wean an addict off surfed once they are hooked. In addition, many people stuck in crime since they can use the internet connection to make some criminal cases such as terrorism or deception. Finally, critics suggest everyone to not depend tremendously on the internet.

However, I believe that several changes have been made because of the internet. Firstly, people can connect to the internet so as to have a conversation with their relatives. Since it provides application such as Facebook and Skype that can be used to chat or face call. In addition, many people who can access the internet putting them into betterment of education. Since the user can utilize the internet search engine to enhance more knowledge. Another effect of the internet is making a jobbing easier to find all the probability of working by surfing. They do need to go around the office for looking an employee. Therefore, the internet is a very crucial thing for humans.

In conclusion, although the internet gives dire consequences for some people, I believe that it is vital since there is a huge adjustment in human's life. Where possible, people have to be used to use the internet to support their social, education and work life.

Writing Feedback / IELTS TASK 2: A satisfying job or a satisfying paycheck [2]

Some people say that in order to be happy, you must have a job you love doing. Others say that others factors are more important.

Do you think that people can only be happy if they have a job really enjoy?

A great deal of individuals assumes that by loving the work position, people can have a job satisfaction. Although it is acceptable to some extent since people have the interest to do it regularly, I strongly believe that salary is the most crucial thing to generate happiness.

To begin with, some people argue that it is fascinating and challenging when people do their wavelength job since they can complete their task with pleasure. For example, an English teacher who likes travelling can ease to go around the world by teaching international students in the foreign country. They will not get rich being a teacher but it leads to a joyful work. Therefore, many people relish their employment having a probability to get satisfied.

However, it is not really true that people enjoy their work can suffer satisfaction. This is because salary has a sufficient contributed so as to make people happy. The adequateness of perks is the main consideration of people in order to make sure their needs are fulfilled by those funds. In addition, salary also influences people to improve their quality of life since it is used to make betterment in health and education. Thus, there is no doubt that perks influence people to become happy.

To sum up, although a satisfying job realizes people into the happy life, I consider that a satisfying paycheck still peaks an effective way to stimulate a joyful of person. Therefore, I would suggest that people should think in depth for the income before chose any kind of job.

Writing Feedback / Staying in the permanent place is more economic although a lack of experiences is still inevitable [2]

In the past, people usually stayed in one place throughout their life. These days, people often move around. They often live in several different places in their lifetime.

What are the advantage and disadvantage of both?

Staying in the permanent place become popular in the past time since it is more economic although a lack of experience is still inevitable. In reverse, people in nowadays tend to live in the different place since spending much money is the drawback from living in the temporary place and getting more knowledge is the advantage of it.

The benefit of unchanging the area of living is having a stable financial since people do not need to invest lots of budget in accommodation and transportation to move around the other areas. However, it cannot be denied that the inhabitants cannot make an extend experience since they have no probability to meet with the novel people in the other place. They are also not allowed to see the breathtaking places on the other sides. Therefore, it is better for humans to do a movement in some areas.

In contrast, there is an advantage of citizens who are moving in diverse places. This is because they encourage the improvement of their knowledge regarding the culture which belonging to the other places. Every location has differed culture and it is good for mankind to learn a novel notion that the local people had. People can also compare their culture to the others. Therefore, it can be a valuable learning for a cultured person.

To sum up, although each session of life either living in the same place or in the various area is obtaining advantage and disadvantage. I believe that both of them can influence the pattern of their family life.

Writing Feedback / Many people argue that creating massive a large grand architecture is very crucial for a modern city [3]

Some people think that large, impressive buildings are important for a city. Others believe that the money should be spent on improving schools and hospitals.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Many people argue that creating massive a large grand architecture is very crucial for urban. However, I believed that it is not recommended since the budget should be invested in the public services.

To begin, the awe-inspiring construction can make the crosstown owning special characteristics. Firstly, the large city has a big edifice as a landmark that will remain the foreign people about that town easily. Secondly, ample splendid buildings are used to be the center of the citizen bustle. That is why the extinction of great concrete buildings is vital to accommodate a great deal of people in the city. In addition, the hefty architecture is the distinguished factor that makes a difference between the city and the countryside. Therefore, the urban should own an awesome edifice since it helpful for the sign of the city.

However it is the vital feature as a part of the city, it is not adequate if the government allocate a lot of funds for making that edifice. Since another crucial thing still inevitable such as the school and the hospital that should be renovated. The society needs good services from the public facilities in order to make betterment for their life. As a result, the government left the edifice to devote much money at institutes and nursing house.

In conclusion, although the sizeable building is a very crucial sign of the city, I still agree that the public needs are the building that helpful for the citizen. It is imperative that focusing on the improvement of the public services is better than build an awesome building.