Tax private car owners to improve public transportation - ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGE?

the policy of taxing private car owners

In order to deal with the current dense volume of traffic, the Vietnamese government suggests a policy in which private car owners should be charged a high fee to improve public transportation. This policy would lead to certain benefits such as reducing traffic density and improving air quality but there are also drawbacks such as causing inconveniences due to the unavailability of public transportation.

On the one hand, the policy would help reduce traffic density and improve air quality. This is because when people are charged a high fee every time they use their cars, they only use them when it is necessary or when they are in emergencies, which would cut down on the number of cars at one time, particularly during rush hours, and ease the traffic density. Additionally, some would choose public transportation for remote purposes instead to avoid paying the tax. This, thus, ends up lower the amount of CO2 emitted into the environment and boosts the overall air quality of the country.

On the other hand, the policy may cause several certain inconveniences due to the unavailability of public transportation. Many areas in Vietnam do not have access to public transportation. Therefore, some can be placed in a situation where they do not have any choice but to use their private cars. For example, one lives in a small town that doesn't have any bus stop or train stations. He/she has to use his/her private car to go to work and pay a heavy tax for using car. However, he/she doesn't have a chance to use public transportation and save money spent on the tax like others, which is quite unfair for him/her.

In conclusion, the policy of taxing private car owners to improve public transportation can help alleviate the volume of traffic and air pollution in Vietnam. Nonetheless, this also leads to some inconveniences because of the unavailability of public transportation. To enhance the efficiency of the policy, the government should widen the public transportation system first to make sure everyone can access them.

The writer will do well to remember that a task 2 essay scores the accuracy of the information provided when compared to the original topic presentation. The first discussion version uses a general government reference. Therefore, the writer should not have represented this as a Vietnamese government proposal in the interpretation. This creates a prompt inaccuracy since the topic basis has been altered from the original reference. This is an error that will cause deductions in the TA section in relation to prompt restatement considerations. However, the appropriateness of the comparative response will somewhat offset that deduction. It is a very strong writer's general opinion with thesis statement declaration.

When writing in the English language, there is no need to use both genders in the presentation. The default gender for English writing is always in the male form. Therefore simply stating "he" and its variations thereof will be sufficient enough to get a good GRA score. The current format being used is confusing as it tries to refer to both genders, creating a confusion in the reference presentation.

The reasons presented are sound but lacking in convincing power due to the lack of proper example in reference to the discussion. An example needs to be clearly referenced as a final result of the suggested discussion. Without it, the solid foundation of the explanation does not really exist.

As for the concluding summary, it will also receive lower TA points due to the same reasons previously stated. The focus of the discussion is a general government, not Vietnam. It should always be reflected as such.

While there are a few problems in the presentation, I believe that the other scoring considerations could help this essay achieve a passing TA score but not higher than a low passing mark due to the observed problems with the presentation. This is a good start. The writer shows that he at least has sufficient English comprehension skills and at least an intermediate grasp of the word usage.