All education and health care should be funded by the government and free for everyone
To what extent do you agree and disagree with this opinion?
citizens' lives is at stake
Some important aspects of citizens' lives should get attention from government such as education and health care. Some people claim that those things should be financed by authority and every one gets free access. I totally disagree about that notion since education and health center should be halved funding by the government and that is also free just for the poor.
For a start, education and a sort of health care are authority's responsibility, but those should be halved in supporting of financial rather than fully funded. Because other aspects need to be financed to help societies lives. Take South Korea as an example of one country, which allocates its money to human development and renewable energy besides education and health care. As a results, South Korea successfully builds its country by balancing supporting finance and gets its desiring purpose such as equality of sharing fund and inhabitants take advantages of this.
Moreover, education and health care should not be free for every one. People, which are funded by government, should be undergone by poor people only. A 2015 Munich studies reveal that one third financed by authority object to those who are in poverty so that they are able to school without thinking about the educational cost. Also, hospital is not the luxury thing for those who suffer from particular diseases. Because of this, the poor will be easy to access the two aspects mentioned above. In other side, the rich are still able to study at school and get medical treatment by their money. As a result, this will bring equality of life to all members of communities.
To conclude, I stand at the idea that education and health center halved funding only by stakeholder to help the poor so that they also get a free access to those facilities. The counterpart should pay for those facilities because they have considerable money that does not need to be depended on the authority. To be predicted, this condition will bring notions to a better condition if money appropriately allocates to the necessity facilities and groups. (343 words)Holt Educational Consultant - / 14,801 
4780 Nur, while your language development and presentation leaves a lot to be desired, that does not detract from the line of reasoning that you are presenting to the reader. The stress of having to analyze your statements exists, but it does not create too severe a problem for the reader. Therefore, you were somewhat successful in delivering a well developed and discussed essay to the reader. The strengths of your essay lie in your clear understanding of the prompt requirements. Your TA scored highly due to the accuracy of your paraphrased opening statement. The GRA was also given better consideration because of the accurately placed examples that you have in your essay. Writing more than 250 words also benefited the essay because you were able to better explain yourself in the essay. It is my belief that the best score this essay could get in an actual setting could be a maximum of 6.
Hi, I just want you to dig deeper the reason why you agree that education and health center halved funding only by stakeholder to help the poor. If you can give the explanation that give strong reason you agree with it like real example, side effect if not, or regulation.
In other side, the rich are still able to study at school and get medical treatment by their money. As a result, this will bring equality of life to all members of communities. It is strong enough i think.
Hi Nur, I really like reading your essay because you wrote this systematically. However, I have found there needed a few improvements for finalizing your essay.
Firstly, you met a misconception in the first body paragraph. Turning to the second sentence, you said that the authority should locate the fund into other sectors. You cannot mention that because there was not a statement that the government only locate budget for both those aspects. Your view is unreasonable to argue the statement.
Following that, you tended to review why the poor family is more suitable for obtaining the fund. Honestly, it's better if you elucidate why the rich family does not get the subsidy. That was only represented at the last two sentences in the second body.
However, I admit that you have shown your ability in the vocabulary. You have been free of repetition and your flow is good. You only need to analyze more so that you can write effectively and efficiently. You have written much vocabulary, but there were a few sentences which did not relate to the topic.
GOOD LUCK for the next writing
