The scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments, not private firms

Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments rather than private companies.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

government protection over scientific research

The given idea argues that research in science should be implemented and monitored by the governments instead of private companies. I do not agree with that opinion. Generally, there are two main advantages when the private companies manipulated a study, being finance resource and discovery motivation.

First of all, the government's budget is limited because they must share for all public activities over the nation. While the companies usually build up funds to invest in research and development for creating and improving products. As the fact that study projects in advanced countries have the trend using money from private organisation based on a cooperative agreement. So that, the financial burden on the national budget associated with science is reduced. Recently, the Asian developing countries have been applying this model in the national strategy of science.

In addition, this cooperation is the important motivation for studying and applying into reality. Authorities must concentrate on their projects and ensure quality of outcomes because they have commitment to sponsors about applicability of these study. By contrast, if government covers all budget for researchers, they can become neglect and lack motivation because of no strict constraints. Formerly, scientific research in Vietnam mainly depend on government budget. Scientists can be approved easily to finish their project through a science council without concerning applicability. Therefore, individual sponsorship constraints is the suitable motivation for research and development.

Consequently, I totally think that research in science should be operated independently by individual companies to boost applicability of scientific research.

Phan, you have a tendency to write hanging sentences. A hanging sentence is a presentation of an incomplete thought or idea. This means, you may have subject but not a verb for your presentation or a verb but no subject. or a variation thereof. An example of a hanging sentence from your essay is as follows:

While the companies usually build up funds to invest in research and development for creating and improving products.

As the fact that study projects in advanced countries have the trend using money from private organisation based on a cooperative agreement.

The first example, should have been connected to the previous sentence rather than making it a stand-alone hanging sentence. The use of a simple comma between the two thoughts would have created a cohesive and coherent sentence presentation. In the second example, you need to provide a fact first, then connect it to this statement either as a stand alone sentence or a blended sentence of 2 thoughts in one presentation.

Finally, since this is an extent essay, you cannot simply "not agree" with the given statement. You need to give a measure of disagreement such as strongly, fully, partially, half heartedly, apprehensively, and other similar "emotional" reference words before your actual agreement/disagreement. You also turned the essay into a direct question response essay by immediately stating your reasons for your decision rather than keeping those for the body of paragraphs, which normally allow you to better explain your reasons. Only a direct question essay gives you the opportunity to create a thesis statement based on your discussion reasons. In all other essays, the thesis statement is provided to you by the agree/disagree, POV discussion instructions.

Actually, I myself am still studying, so let's study together.

... limited because they must share for all ...

I am more familiar with objects: they must share it
Effective sentences will make other people better understand the writing.

Please input it :)