writing by TCWH

tcwh6688UID：2671847

Do you agree that the government should support the scientific research even there’s no practical use?

A great deal of money is used to support the scientific researches by government every year, for those researches are able to resolve some difficult which impede the development of social and then to bring a better life condition for people. Some individuals claim that scientific researched which have no practical use should be supported by government. Doing scientific researches, however, not only needs a long time and many specialists, but requires a huge financial support as well. If there is no practical use, it is no doubt a kind of waste.

As we all know, the finance which is used to support scientific research is limited, but the scientific researches could be countless. Thus, the money should be used in a right place which is able to truly resolve practical issues to let people live more convenient. Recently, for instance, the increase in gasoline price is a big problem which people concern. If government put the money on this issue to find a new substitute which is not only in favor of environment but also less expensive for gasoline, people do not need to sigh when they watch the gasoline counter jumping, meanwhile the degree of global warming would be relieved. In the contrast, if the research is no practical use, not only would the huge finance be wasted, but a great deal of time of the experts would be wasted as well. Therefore, facing so many choice, government should support the money to a research which brings a benefit for social.

Furthermore, the finance of the government mostly is the tax which is collected from people. So, government should manage to bring a benefit for people using the money instead of doing meaningless research. For instance, Japanese government put a great deal of money on the research of predicting the earthquake, for earthquake happens frequently in their country. By providing a accurate predict of earthquake for their people, Japanese are able to escape more successfully when earthquake happens. What is more, their country would encounter less loss in both people and possession. In short, government support money to a scientific research which has practical use would have more profit and are good for people.

Granted, some scientific researches which is no practical use may expand people’s knowledge, bring a different angle for people to think of the questions. But, compared with those scientific researches which are more helpful to people, social and world, the limited finance should be used in a more efficient way.

mpromanusUID：2565872

1# tcwh6688

Do you agree that the government should support the scientific research even there’s no practical use?

A great deal of money is used to support the scientific researches by the government every year, for those researches are able to resolve some difficulties which that impede the development of social (social what? 'Social' when used as a noun has a very specific meaning as 社交活动, and I don't think that's what you intend to express here.) and then to bring a better life condition for people. Some individuals claim that scientific researches which have no practical use should also (Because the researches you have described in the first sentence are obviously the ones 'of practical use'.) be supported by the government. Doing scientific researches, however, not only needs a long time and many specialists, but requires a huge financial support as well. If there is no practical use, it is no doubt a kind of waste.

As we all know, the finance (You mean 'budget'?) which is used to support scientific researches is limited, but the scientific researches could be countless. Thus, the money should be used in a right place which is able to truly resolve practical issues to let people live more conveniently (Strictly speaking, you don't describe people's lives as 'convenient'. This word means 'facilitating, near at hand, affording advantage'. It is often associated with time scheduling or location more than anything else.). Recently, for instance, the increase in gasoline price is a big problem which people are concerned with . If the government puts the money on this issue to find a new substitute which is not only in favor of the environment but also less expensive than gasoline, people do not need to sigh when they watch the gasoline counter jumping, meanwhile the degree of global warming would be relieved. In the contrast, if the research is of no practical use, not only would the huge finance (See beginning of paragraph.) be wasted, but a great deal of time of the experts would be wasted as well. (I'm not criticizing your argument but I do want to provide some perspectives. It's not that researches have not been done on alternative energy resources, but rather whether the government is willing to put in the money to deploy and promote the use of it - note, this is beyond the capability of any research. Let me give you an example: would you prefer to use natural gas to fuel your car, if there is only one natural gas station in your city and you have to queue forever to get your car refilled? Even though natural gas is clean, cheap, and so much better than oil? Yes, you have something better than gasoline, but you need to build an entire infrastructure for people to really start using that better energy source. Who do you think has the power to do such things? Things do not just get done because there is a research. That is often only the very first step. If the government cannot guarantee the systematic deployment of any good thing done by any research, then you're in effect still going to waste a lot of money and time because the research results are not being put into use. So, after all this, how do you judge which researches are 'practical' and which ones are not? Think about it.) Therefore, facing so many choices, government should support the money to a research which brings a benefit for social (Again...social what?).

Furthermore, the finance of the government mostly is the tax which is collected from people. So, the government should manage to bring a benefit for people using the money instead of doing meaningless research. For instance, the Japanese government put a great deal of money on the research of predicting the earthquake, for earthquake happens frequently in their country. By providing a accurate prediction of earthquake for their people, the Japanese are able to escape more successfully when an earthquake happens. What is more, their country would encounter less loss in both people and possessions. In short, the government that supports money to a scientific research which has of practical use would have more profit and are good for people. (Ahh..but the Japanese were still not able to escape from that great earthquake and tsunami of the century..and what is more, what once was thought to be a great energy source has become a major threat because the power of nature is simply beyond whatever precautions men can take. Again, it comes back to that simple question - how much 'practical'-ness is useful, and how much is not? How do you judge? Something can very well be practical one moment and entirely outrageous the next. Again, this is not to say you're wrong. Simply something for you to ponder on.)


Granted, some scientific researches which is of no practical use may expand people’s knowledge, bring a different angle for people to think of the questions. But, compared with those scientific researches which are more helpful to people, social (Now I start to think you mean 'the society'..) and the world, the limited finance should be used in a more efficient way.


总结：


乱用定冠词和which is从句型请注意一下。。很多地方根本不需要从句也使用从句的，会让你的文章十分拗口。


陈述方面，你对于反面论点的处理有些苍白。论述上没有什么太大的问题，对于practical use和research的理解虽然比较偏于表面不过并不对文章本身有什么影响，所以还是请多注意一下语言简洁和用词准确为好。

tcwh6688UID：2671847

Do you agree or not with following statement: most people solve their important problems by themselves or with the help from their families; the help from government is not necessary.

The life, it seems, is filled with a great variety of problems waiting to be solved. Some problems, relatively personal, can be handled through constantly effort by individuals. Nevertheless, when it comes to those complex ones involved more aspects, resorting to government is supposed to be the only and best option, for its stronger influence and power.

It is plausible that people may pride of their independence for disposing of varieties of issues by themselves. However, if we examine such a statement carefully, we will definitely find it far from the truth. In fact, the help from Government has permeated everywhere in people’ life, from basic necessities to maintaining public order. Without government, people can never be able to conceive of a normal life, not mention well-being. The help from government is even as small as controlling the price of food in market, as big as assuring the security of whole society. For instance, Yangyang, a three years old boy, was kidnapped when he was playing in yard of our community last year. After disappearance for several hours, the boy’s parents were aware of what had happened. They almost find every possible place, but nothing. The boy’ father finally resorted to the Police, hoping to get his son back. One month later, the boy was finally found in a remote outskirt through a hard investigation by policeman. Owed to the police, otherwise boy might never be able to see his parents again. Consequently, the help from government is quite necessary.

Furthermore, apparently, government has more advantages to help people get out of plight than by people themselves in the same situation, for having more funding and stronger influence. For instance, in some regions, a great many children cannot accept the basic education, because they are born in poor families. With rare exceptions, they never have the chance to improve their lives. Unless they have the opportunity to learn knowledge to change their life, those children would have difficulties finding decent jobs and making a decent life. In this case, only can government offer the most efficient way to solve this issue, rather than rely on their own ability. The government built a new school for those children and let them have class without charge. Plus, the needy facilities would receive subsidy to some extent offered by government. With the help from government, those children not only have the opportunity to turn to be someone but are able to do contribution to their hometown after growing up as well. Therefore, it is necessary to gain the help from government

To sum up, government serves people, protects people, supervises people, is a powerful support and back to people. Thus, people are by not mean able to live without the help from government.

mpromanusUID：2565872

3# tcwh6688

Do you agree or not with following statement: most people solve their important problems by themselves or with the help from their families; the help from government is not necessary.

The life (If you use 'the', the noun should be specific or non-ambiguous, e.g. 'the life of <someone>', 'the life of a human being'. If you want to use 'life' as a collective, generic noun, it should be without any article.), it seems, is filled with a great variety of problems waiting to be solved. Some problems, relatively personal, can be handled through constantly effort by individuals. Nevertheless, when it comes to those complex ones involved more aspects, resorting to the government (Here you can't use 'government' as a collective noun because that would mean 'any government and/or all governments'. I know it might be hard to understand when to and not to use 'the', but for now just remember this is how it is used.) is supposed to be the only and best option, for its (What is this 'it'? The 'option'?) stronger influence and power.

It is plausible that people may pride of their independence in disposing of varieties of issues by themselves. However, if we examine such a statement carefully, we will definitely find it far from the truth. In fact, the help from the Government has permeated everywhere in people’ lives, from basic necessities to maintaining public order. Without a government, people can never be able to conceive of a normal life, not to mention well-being (But pre-historic people survived pretty well without much of a government..). The help from government is even as small as controlling the price of food in market (It might seem small but it isn't so, really..), as big as assuring the security of the whole society. For instance, Yangyang, a three years old boy, was kidnapped when he was playing in the yard of our community last year. After disappearance of several hours, the boy’s parents were aware of what had happened. They almost find every possible place (You mean, they 'searched' every possible place..), but nothing. The boy’ father finally resorted to the Police, hoping to get his son back. One month later, the boy was finally found in a remote outskirt through a hard investigation by policemen. Owed to the police (This is not a complete sentence.), otherwise the boy might never be able to see his parents again. Consequently, the help from the government is quite necessary. (Well. But if a kid can be kidnapped out of his own yard in broad daylight, isn't that quite an indicatioin that social security is no good and the government is not really doing its job well? Especially when you said that the government is helping to assure 'the security of the whole society'? Think carefully about how you phrase your example and your statements so it at least doesn't crash back on itself.)

Furthermore, apparently, the government has more advantages to help people get out of plights than by people themselves in the same situation, for having more funding and stronger influence. For instance, in some regions, a great many children cannot receive the basic education, because they are born in poor families. With rare exceptions, they never have the chance to improve their lives. Unless they have the opportunity to learn knowledge to change their lives, those children would have difficulties finding decent jobs and making a decent life. In this case, only can the government offer the most efficient way to solve this issue, rather than rely on their own ability. The government built (Now I'm all confused by your use of tense. Are you describing a general situation, or are you describing an actual event that had happened?) a new school for those children and let them have class without charge. Plus, the needy facilities would receive subsidies to some extent offered by the government. With the help from the government, those children not only have the opportunity to turn to be someone?? but are able to do contribute to their hometown after growing up as well. Therefore, it is necessary to gain the help from the government (Well. Again, a lot of such schools are not built with funding from the local governments but rather funds from charities..the local government is involved mostly because of administration rights. But I'm not saying this to contend your writing. This paragraph is well written.)

To sum up, the government serves people, protects people, supervises people (This, you never talk about in the essay.), is a powerful support and back?? to people. Thus, people are by not means able to live without the help from government. (If you compare this with the question it should be easy to see how far you're off..the question is about whether government help is necessary for important problems, not whether people can or cannot live without government help..)

总结：

你的语言功底其实不错，就是冠词和有时会出现很拗口的类直翻的表达，请注意一下。

论述方面，把你结论段的最后一句话和问题放在一起，应该就很容易看出来了。。你全篇都在注重government help是不是necessary，但是问题是有important problems这个限制的。。你在开头段里只是提了一下complex，然后就再也没点过这个方面。虽然你的例子举得很恰当，但是因为你没点到题目这一点，造成你最后并没有支持到题目多少。。所以请注意全面地点题。。

tcwh6688UID：2671847

谢谢国宝姐

mpromanusUID：2565872

5# tcwh6688

tcwh6688UID：2671847

作文

mpromanusUID：2565872

7# tcwh6688

tcwh6688UID：2671847

作文

mpromanusUID：2565872

9# tcwh6688

tcwh6688UID：2671847

作文

mpromanusUID：2565872

11# tcwh6688

tcwh6688UID：2671847

作文

mpromanusUID：2565872

13# tcwh6688

tcwh6688UID：2671847

作文