Some people think that it would be better for large companies and industry to move to countrysides

moving big businesses to remote areas

It is said that relocating large companies to rural areas offers changes for better. From my point of view, I claimed that it bring more backdraws than benefits.

Undeniably, replacing large factories may yeild considerable merits. Firstly, that companies move to remote places contributes the promotion of living standards in rural areas.In particular, local people will be provided job opportunities which give them chances to boost their income and improvements of their life qualities. Additionally, the relocation of companies probably enhances the development of local economy. To be specific, buiding large factories always accompanies with the construction of infrastructure and profitable investment, significantly which stimulates the production and trade with other areas. Therefore, the local market is likely to be expanded and diversified as well as local budget and profit may be sizably increased, which facilitates the weath of communities in this areas, Bac Ninh city for example.

However, the move of large companies have detrimental effects in many aspects. In term of environment, large factories and massive production will cause severe pollution. That factories release toxic pollutants in the air or dump poision in the water drastically devastates the ecological systems and causes serious health problems. In addition, they need to accept the higher cost of transportation which leads to the rise in products' price and relieve their strengths compared to enemies. To be particular, remote areas are deprived of materials and services utilizing in process and far from potential costumers ;therefore, it is necessary to arise expense for delivery to guarantee the production. Finally, this changes may distort the lifestyle of local people. For instance, the appearance of large factories sharply promote urbanization and mordernization which stimulates people to focus on high productivity and lucrative profit rather than the beauty of traditional customs.

In conclusion, regardless of strengths of this tendency, adverse impacts of it are terrible and foreseeable

Kindly review the original prompt and compare it to the statement presented here. There are several points of difference between the original presentation and the restatement in terms of references, focus, and reason that have affected the current presentation. This should be at least a 3 sentence presentation if it were to properly restate the original and offer a personal opinion with an acceptable thesis reference. Comparing the original prompt with the restatement is essential if one wishes to receive a high baseline score for the test.

The first paragraph will not receive a score as it does not support the personal opinion of the writer. Rather, is confuses the examiner who will wonder why the exam taker is defending the opposing opinion instead of using 2 strong reasons to support his own opinion. The idea behind the prompt is to prove that the advantages are actually disadvantages. It is a written debate based on 2 opposite reasons in each paragraph. That means the writing format is:

Sentence 1: Advantage
Sentence 2: Why?
Sentence 3: Should it be considered a disadvantage?
Sentence 4: Explain
Sentence 5: Present a supporting example in transition sentence form.

As only the 2nd paragraph will receive a score for supporting the presented opinion, the essay cannot be given a score based on a properly developed essay. It is definitely lacking in correct reasoning development. The under-worded concluding summary did not help either. It will result in even more point deductions in the end as it is not composed of at least 3 sentences that offer a summary of the previous discussion.