6. As populations grow and cities become more crowded, there is pressure throughout the world to construct ever-taller building to provide accommodation and offices. Many people object to such developments, citing the social as well as the physical dangers. Do you agree with objections to skyscrapers?
Overpopulation creates a huge demand of accomodation in many cities. Ironically, many people refuse the construction of skyscrappers which obviously are helpful to overcome this problem. I totally oppose that attitude towards such developments of infrastructure because tall buildings are the most efficient accomodation for overcrowded city.
The fear of physical and social dangers which are brought by skysraper's construction is the main reason why people reject such developments. First of all, the construction of skyscrappers is surounded by harmful materials and heavy machines so that they are affraid of high accident risk around that particular area. Most of them also belive that tall structures are more fragile when it comes to natural disaster such as earthquake. In addition, apartment blocks are unsuitable environment to raise children as there are no open areas and too much strangers living in the same building. It results in less interaction of people within the building because there are no lounge area for gathering with the neighbours while they look over their kids. However, in my view, it is unreasonable if people object the effort of providing enough shelters to accomodate huge number of citizens.
In fact, the sturdiness of a construction depends on the design and material used to build it. Advanced technology and knowledge of architecture these days helps much to create a safe, beautiful, longlast and functional skyscrapers in many different types of land. Therefore, the pobability of accidents associated with tall building in present is minuscule. Moreover, in many cities, a wide empty spaces are very difficult to find. For this reason, constructing tall building for offices and apartments is very advantageous as it can accomodate hundredfolds of people in same area dimension compared to ordinary houses or offices. This case is also potential to reduce the number of homelesses and inner-city slums so that the envinonment will become more friendly. In all, there are many reasons to say that skyscrapers is promising to fulfill the need of accomodations in limited spaces which are overpopulated.
In conclusion, although there are some arguments that make tall buildings seem dangerous, I totally support cities to have more tall constructions because it is clear that the benefits is more reasonable. If society keep rejecting such developments, more people will struggle to find home and occupation in the future as there will be no space for them in the city.
Your structure of writing is excellent. You have explained the argument and also the counter-argument, and you refuted the counter-argument. This is very impressive, and there are just a few places where the grammar can be fixed:
... because tall buildings are the most efficient accomodations for an overcrowded city.
First of all, the construction of
skyscrappers skyscrapers is surounded surrounded by harmful materials and heavy machines so that they are affraid afraid of high accident ...
Most of them also
belive believe ...
Use plural in this situation:
... to natural disasters such as earthquakes .
is also has potential to reduce....
... seem dangerous, I totally support the view that cities
to should ...