Writing Feedback / RAPID ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RESULTED HIGHER LIVING STANDARDS IN TOWNS, NOT IN VILLAGES [5]

Topic:

In recent years some countries have experienced very rapid economic development. This has resulted in much higher standards of living in urban areas but non in the countryside.

This situation may bring some problems for the country as a whole.

What are these problems?

How might they be reduced?

the much higher standards of living in urban areas because people belong to villages have migrated to cities,that is the reason cities are more crowded.

there are certain problems due to lack of facilities in the coutry sides.they can be reduced in many ways.
during few years ,some countries have experienced very rapid economic developments.because people is getting more education.Now they are moving towards urban areasfor the seek of better education .Because there is no university in the country side and less facilities of transport.In the villages,there is not higher standards of health.People who came from villages after getting better education from the cities,have became the permanent residence of cities so the cities have become congested and amount of vehicles on the road is also becoming the major problem now_a_days.During the peak hours more number of vehicles become obstacle on the way of those persons who had got late from their offices or schools.As a result of this more road accidents are happening.due to these problems people are getting depress .More number of vehicles cause noise pollution and air pollution as well.

beside this villages have less facilities.If a person got severe disease in the country side then lack of advance health technologies in the village.He will go to the citiy for better treatment with advance technology because he have no choice.villagers who have faced such problems so they are restricted for migration.

In conclusion,problems like transport,lack of green houses in the urban areas ,government should pay attention on all these problems and should provide the equal standards of living in villages and cities as well.

Writing Feedback / Safe alternatives to fossil fuels should be the most important global priority today [2]

The exploration and development of safe alternatives to fossil fuels should be the most important global priority today.

To what extent do you agree and disagree?

Burning fossil fuels raise the level of carbon dioxide in the environment.so use of safe alternatives will avoid the global warming.I am agree with the statement that safe alternative to fossil fuels should be our global priority.

world wide significance of the safe alternative to the coal,oil,natural gas should be investigate and develop.burning of fossil fuels cause the pollution in the environment.It is found that these fossil fuels are the main reasons for the global warming.These fossil fuels make the environmental temperature hot especially in summer.hot temperature melts the oceans so there will be more floods.pollution creates more health issues .if the environment is polluted then the existence of mankind will be impossible.for the existence of human on earth it is necessary to overcome the use of these fossil fuels.vehicles should be use bio_diesel that is the safe alternative of fossil fuel because vehicles emit carbon dioxide which causes the air pollution in the atmosphere.solar energy should be use for the purpose of electricity.

government should provide sources for the conversion of solar energy into electric power.although some other countries like china and america solar energy has been used.

in conclusion, fossil fuels are using for the electriciy and other vital purposes.despite of this safe alternatives should be use for healthy environment.

Writing Feedback / GOVERNMENT SHOULD BARE THE COST FOR SPECIAL UNDERGRADUATE COURSE [3]

Modern societies need specialists in certain fields but not in others .some people therefore think that government should pay university fees for students who study subjects that are needed by the society .those who choose to study less relevant subjects should not receive government funding.would the advantages subjects of such an educational policy out weigh the disadvantage:

Large universities offer various subjects for the students .Some student choose subjetcts that are highly needed to the society but some student study less relevant subjects.Government will pay fees of particular subjects ,essential for society progress.it is refuted that the advantages of such an educational policy out weigh the disadvantages.

Likewise,if the government pay the fees for professional course such as doctors,engineers as well as lawyers.Although some students are not interested in mathematics .They want to select arts ,literature but as a free of cost course ,they choose engineering.consequently they could not become good engineers.

In contrast,students choose the subjects for those government will pay fees .after that,during the years of study ,he feels the difficulty in subject or if he feels no interest .In that case he will quit the subject.On the other hand if he paid himself then it will difficult for him to leave subject.

To recapitulate,specialist who is not perfect in certain field or un suitable for him while others are going to leave un interested course.so the advantages of such an educational policy do not out weigh the disadvantages.such policy could not be beneficial for the country.