Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal. Some people, however, think that other types of progress are equally important for a country. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Many governments rank economic development the top goal over all others. Yet this is an opinion with which some people disagree, who think other types of progress are just as important for a country. In the essay, I will start by discussing these two points of views and continue with my personal insight into the matter.
Governments give precedence to economic growth on the ground that stronger economic performance means a larger amount of funds, from which their country will stand to benefit. On one hand, a better-funded government can invest more in infrastructure construction to better meet the needs of their citizens for electricity supply, potable water, and transport services, among others. On the other hand, people with a deeper pocket feel free to satisfy their appetite for products and services that they hesitated to buy in the past. Therefore both governments and individuals are to thrive. However, reasonable as the argument sounds, some people think otherwise.
In their view, it is unwise to prioritize economic advance, since there are other goals of no less importance for a country. Take environment protection as an example. If pollution arises, human life and health will come under grave threat. Toxic air can ruin the lungs and stinky water can devastate the stomach. For whoever struggle with disease or death, even the greatest economic success will be reduced to meaninglessness. For this reason, equal priority should be placed to conservation and economic progress.
For my part, I share the point immediately above, since, based on my personal experience, governments are tempted to overlook what they consider less important. The Chinese authorities have just made such a mistake. When they embraced the concept of economy first, environment protection was sidelined or even dissolved into insignificance in certain cases. The consequence is obvious: Beijing, the capital of my country, is frequently shrouded in the immense, murky clouds of acrid smog.
Considering all the arguments above, the conclusion is that economic growth should not take precedence over other types of progress. Admittedly, it benefits a country by helping governments and individuals prosper, but other goals as vital do exist. In addition, when economic progress is established as the principle task, the less important is at risk of losing the attention it deserves.
===
I have three questions about the essay.
First, "other types of progress" is too general. When it comes to the presentation of "other types of progress are equally important for a country", many model essays choose to list a series of goals deemed as important, including social justice, human rights, equality, democracy or even lgbt community. But I chose a single explame, such as environment protection, to elaborate the idea. Which method better meets the requirement of IELTS writing?
The second question is about my conclusion. In the final paragraph, I tried to restate the prompts and distill the key point in the discussion of each paragraph. Is it a proper way to write the conclusion?
The last question is about the word counts. Since I have to give a complete paragraph to the pro side, the con side and my own opinion each, the word counts is well above 250 - reaching 377. Is it OK in a actual test?
I would more appreciate it if you score my essay.
Many governments rank economic development the top goal over all others. Yet this is an opinion with which some people disagree, who think other types of progress are just as important for a country. In the essay, I will start by discussing these two points of views and continue with my personal insight into the matter.
Governments give precedence to economic growth on the ground that stronger economic performance means a larger amount of funds, from which their country will stand to benefit. On one hand, a better-funded government can invest more in infrastructure construction to better meet the needs of their citizens for electricity supply, potable water, and transport services, among others. On the other hand, people with a deeper pocket feel free to satisfy their appetite for products and services that they hesitated to buy in the past. Therefore both governments and individuals are to thrive. However, reasonable as the argument sounds, some people think otherwise.
In their view, it is unwise to prioritize economic advance, since there are other goals of no less importance for a country. Take environment protection as an example. If pollution arises, human life and health will come under grave threat. Toxic air can ruin the lungs and stinky water can devastate the stomach. For whoever struggle with disease or death, even the greatest economic success will be reduced to meaninglessness. For this reason, equal priority should be placed to conservation and economic progress.
For my part, I share the point immediately above, since, based on my personal experience, governments are tempted to overlook what they consider less important. The Chinese authorities have just made such a mistake. When they embraced the concept of economy first, environment protection was sidelined or even dissolved into insignificance in certain cases. The consequence is obvious: Beijing, the capital of my country, is frequently shrouded in the immense, murky clouds of acrid smog.
Considering all the arguments above, the conclusion is that economic growth should not take precedence over other types of progress. Admittedly, it benefits a country by helping governments and individuals prosper, but other goals as vital do exist. In addition, when economic progress is established as the principle task, the less important is at risk of losing the attention it deserves.
===
I have three questions about the essay.
First, "other types of progress" is too general. When it comes to the presentation of "other types of progress are equally important for a country", many model essays choose to list a series of goals deemed as important, including social justice, human rights, equality, democracy or even lgbt community. But I chose a single explame, such as environment protection, to elaborate the idea. Which method better meets the requirement of IELTS writing?
The second question is about my conclusion. In the final paragraph, I tried to restate the prompts and distill the key point in the discussion of each paragraph. Is it a proper way to write the conclusion?
The last question is about the word counts. Since I have to give a complete paragraph to the pro side, the con side and my own opinion each, the word counts is well above 250 - reaching 377. Is it OK in a actual test?
I would more appreciate it if you score my essay.
