Dear all, it is me again... the more I am here viewing people's essay the less confidence for me to post mine... anyway, I'm anonymous and nobody so I have nothing to lose. And most importantly I like the members here always willing to give me hand. So here I am.
can the tax raise reduce traffic jam and pollution?
Some people tell that to reduce traffic and pollution, government should increase the tax on petrol (gasoline).
Would there is note benefits than the drawbacks?
Nowadays traffic jam and pollution are the major issues that appear on almost every developed country. To eliminate the impacts that cause, some people suggest that the government should raise the tax on petrol to reduce congestion and pollution. While the tax increase may bring some benefits to the society, I think we should consider the negative impacts it may arise.
On the one hand, some people believe that there will be lesser number of private vehicles on road if government impose a higher petrol tax. It is because the high tax will push up the oil price hence the driver's cost on travelling by private car will also increase. That lead car owner to seek for an alternative, the public transportation system for instance, when they travel. As a result both traffic congestion and pollution problems will be eased off.
On the other hand, besides the car owners, citizen also have to bear the cost due to the price rise on the gasoline if the higher tax policy is apply. The reason behind is that the tax increase will also affecting anyone who use petrol such as public transportation and logistics companies. In the end the amount increase on new taxation policy will transferred to their clients, such as, by raising the ticket fees and prices for food, commodities and durables. Hence if the government is aim to focus on introduce higher tact to the private car owners, this will minimize the impact thus the policy for the public.
In conclusion, although the tax raise may brings negative impact to everyone in the city, it actually can reduce traffic jam and pollution. So I believe this policy bring to the society more beneficial effects than detrimental.
Greetings, my friend, you did a good job, but there are some things you should pay attention to:
I - Introduction
1. You did right when you stated your opinion in the introduction (always do that), but you should consider that the end, you said: "I believe this policy bring to the society more beneficial effects than detrimental". Therefore, why not adding a phrase mentioning the drawbacks of the taxation and, then, saying that, despite such drawbacks, this measure should be beneficial? What I mean is that, in the introduction, you highlight the drawbacks of the taxation, but, in the conclusion, you highlighted its benefits."
2. The phrase "To eliminate the impacts that cause, some people suggest that the government should raise the tax on petrol to reduce congestion and pollution" is grammatically incorrect, as it is unclear who cause the impact. Try something like: "To eliminate their impacts, some people".
II - Development
1. Good job contrasting the benefits and drawbacks of the taxation!
2. Shouldn't invert the order of the paragraphs? You would be able to quickly mention the drawbacks and, in the end - nearer to the conclusion -, start your paragraph with something like "In spite of this, some people believe..."
3. As you are writing an argumentative essay, you should state your beliefs more confidently. Instead of saying "... there will be lesser number of ...", say that there will be fewer cars on the road and, then, show why.
4. There are some grammar spelling mistakes:
"there will be lesser number of [fewer, as "lesser" means something of little importance] private vehicles on road [the road] if government [the government] imposes a higher petrol tax.
"It is because" seems too simple for an exam essay. Why not using "... if the government impose a higher petrol tax, as it will push ..."
"That leads car"
"citizens also have"
"policy is apply" - this should be a passive voice: "is applied"
"The reason behind is" - again, too simple, but, if you want to keep it, you should write "behind this is"
"clients, such as, by raising" - just remove the expression
III - Conclusion
1. Why not writing a bigger summary of your thesis here? You may restate the benefits and drawbacks mentioned and, then, say that the measure should be taken.
Well, I hope my comments helped you :)
Best regards,
Arthur.
Thanks! Thanks Arthur for your feedback.
You caught me, I was confused on choosing which side at the beginning and firm my position after but forgot to change the order of the paragraphs (and modify the introduction paragraph to keep the tone of the essay align)
Re the simple sentences and phrases... yes I was trying to keep it simple since I was used to mistakenly think that write something complex and it end up with run-on and difficult to read... I am still finding the balance of it. It is true that i need more vocabularies or synonyms or whatever, still lot to learn from you guys!
Re the conclusion, do you mean it would look better if I go deeper on paraphrasing my body paragraphs there?
Holt Educational Consultant - / 14,801 
4780 @smally01 you almost got the prompt paraphrase completely right. You made a slight error in your direct question response. That is, you only tackled one of the two aspects for discussion. BTW, can you do me a favor next time and please, double check the question before you post your essay? I believe it or not, your original prompt has been almost consistently inaccurately worded and it makes reading the prompt and trying to figure out what the instructions are extremely difficult for the reader. Practice being a responsible writer even now. Double check the original prompts before you post. The original question is "Would there be more benefits than drawbacks?" Your autocorrect is on, which tells me that you are probably typing on your mobile phone. Turn off auto-correct if you can please. Post as originally written as well.
This is a comparative essay discussion. So when the question is: Would there be more benefits than drawbacks, the correct response is " This essay will consider whether or not there are more gains than losses with regards to the increase in gasoline taxes."
Your comparison discussion is acceptable. However, you have some grammatical inaccuracies such as the use of the word "tact" which means, "adroitness and sensitivity in dealing with others or with difficult issues." Did you mean to say "tax" instead?
This is a 5 paragraph essay. So your belief should have been in a separate stand alone paragraph, not, as I keep reminding the students, in the concluding summary because the concluding summary just presents a short version of your discussion to the reader. The format:
1. Paraphrase
2. Topic 1
3. Topic 2
4. Personal opinion
5. Concluding summary
Dear Holt, thanks for the comments. And sorry for not doing the proofread on the topic question before post.
I will try to state my point of view clearly (and correctly) to the introduction next time, since mine one here looks like to respond to the question of "discuss both these views" more than "do the advantages outweigh its disadvantages".
Hi Smally
Nice essay in term of structure and vocab. As the other two pointed out you need to proofread your work. Do not give the examiner the chance to degrade your fine work with some typo or obvious mistakes in grammar.
Just a tip here, if you are in shortage of time and you still want to point out your opinion without writing another paragragh, you could ask phrase such as I believe or in my opinion, from my standpoint in the 2nd paragraph that you choose to support. Besides, to make it even clearer, in the 1st one, you can use phrase like some people believe. It is assumed by some people...
Hope that helps
Keep it up
