issue 195, 我鼓起勇气的第一篇,欢迎拍砖,必回

tony_chaoUID: 187700

195. “The goal of politics should not be pursuit of an ideal, but rather the search for common ground and reasonable consensus.”

自己限时了,但是超时三分钟.郁闷中!!!
而且自己越看越不顺,希望师兄师姐们心情的拍啊,我也争取天天回拍. 在寄托版第一次发贴,见谅见谅.
What is the true goal of politics? Many people argue that for several centuries, but my insisting on that the goal of politics should not be pursuit of an ideal, but rather the search for common ground and reasonable consensus.
You see, the politicians often promise all the voters who support them that they should give them some benefits which they want if they balance the ballots to them. But they seldom keep their promise even many of them forget what they have promised from their standing for the political stage on. So all of the promises are only an ideal to the voters. This kind of the ideal will make the politic much less effectively and eliminate the image of the government or the party in the society. Of course, there also are some politicians can do some thing for the people or for the society utilities. But in another way there is no effective result too. We can suggest that Government should be consist of many people who are interested in people’s welfare and they will make many policies which point some good ideals in the future to be appreciate for the people. Without the expectancy, they often find they are well be averse to a prospect involving a small risk of a large welfare loss but a large chance of a relatively small welfare gain, even if the prospect implies an expected ex post utility gain. It is because that the “mental bad”, which come from the agony that the government suffer from when they try best to maximize the utility but being dare of the risk of loosen welfare, effect on the policy making. So the objective will be an ideal to the society forever as long as this situation exists. All of the distance between the perceived utility and the reality utility will make a negative effect on the society utility and make the government or the politics much more ineffective and idealization.
Of course, the only solution of this problem is that we must search for common ground and reasonable consensus between the political objective and the reality. For example, democracy is the most popular word everywhere, but I think it is an ideal to the society in politics. Now more and more nations think the word is a medicine which can give a better health to every people, but the situation is opposition, much more political puzzles surface out though the democracy solve many problems. We won’t depend on the ideal of the democracy that it will give everyone an authority to participate the management of the country. In my opinion, the essence of democracy isn’t the ideal what society it can make but the unite of the practice and the democracy objective. The final effective result which democracy can give the people just are three points: first, it can give people the autonomy; second, it can prevent the government abusing the power; last but not least, it can ensure the government deliver the public goods to the society on time. If a country can finish the three points, the country is a efficiency and effective, and those countries, having the democracy mechanism so-called, which can’t make the fundamental orders from democracy are only have an idealization perspective. Only are combine the political goal with the reality and searching the common ground and reasonable consensus between them the reality utility which the politics can produce.
The politic is serving the nation but not a little people, a group or a party. It is why what the public be interested in is just the same as the politics. So the sagacious politics won’t pursue the ideal without any effective improvement rather than they will confront the reality and make good use of the resource in the society to produce the utility according the public interests through searching the common utility among the society, the people and the politics.

iverUID: 198348

195. “The goal of politics should not be pursuit of an ideal, but rather the search for common ground and reasonable consensus.”

What is the true goal of politics? Many people argue that for several centuries, but my insisting on that the goal of politics should not be pursuit of an ideal, but rather the search for common ground and reasonable consensus/最好能够将题目的文字改动后，再表达出来，比一字不动的写原话更好/.
You see, the politicians often promise all the voters who support them that they should give them some benefits which they want if they balance the ballots to them. But they seldom keep their promise （最好分开来说，比如 But they seldom keep their promises, even most of them...）even many of them forget what they have promised from their standing for the political stage on(感觉from their standing for the political stage on有些牵强，可以用ago或者将此句写为：what they have already promised). So all of the promises are only an ideal to the voters. This kind of the ideal will make the politic much(delete ""Much") less effectively and eliminate the image of the government or the party in the society. Of course, there also are(are also) some politicians (add "who")can do some thing for the people or for the society utilities. But in another way there is no effective result too(in the negative, you had better use "either" instead too). We can suggest that Government should be consist of many people who are interested in people’s welfare and they will make many policies which point some good ideals in the future to be appreciate for the people. Without the expectancy, they often find they are well be averse to a prospect involving a small risk of a large welfare loss but a large chance of a relatively small welfare gain, even if the prospect implies an expected ex post utility gain. It is because that the “mental bad”, which come from the agony that the government suffer from when they try best to maximize the utility but being dare of the risk of loosen welfare, effect on the policy making. So the objective will be an ideal to the society forever as long as this situation exists. All of the distance between the perceived utility and the reality utility will make a negative effect on the society utility and make the government or the politics much more ineffective and idealization.
Of course, the only solution of this problem is that we must search for common ground and reasonable consensus between the political objective and the reality. For example, democracy is the most popular word everywhere, but I think it is an ideal to the society in politics. Now more and more nations think the word is a medicine which can give a better health to every people, but the situation is opposition, much more political puzzles surface out though the democracy solve many problems. We won’t depend on the ideal of the democracy that it will give everyone an authority to participate the management of the country. In my opinion, the essence of democracy isn’t the ideal what society it can make but the unite of the practice and the democracy objective. The final effective result which democracy can give the people just are three points: first, it can give people the autonomy; second, it can prevent the government abusing the power; last but not least, it can ensure the government deliver the public goods to the society on time. If a country can finish the three points, the country is a efficiency and effective, and those countries, having the democracy mechanism so-called, which can’t make the fundamental orders from democracy are only have an idealization perspective. Only are combine the political goal with the reality and searching the common ground and reasonable consensus between them the reality utility which the politics can produce.
The politic is serving the nation but not a little people, a group or a party. It is why (the reason)what the public be interested in is just the same as the politics(这个句子好像有语法问题). So the sagacious politics won’t pursue the ideal without any effective improvement rather than they will confront the reality and make good use of the resource in the society to produce the utility according the public interests through searching the common utility among the society, the people and the politics
整体写得可以，最好，多用一些符合逻辑的过渡词汇
我写的，您也帮忙看看好吧：https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=252108

flyfish9UID: 156664

195. “The goal of politics should not be pursuit of an ideal, but rather the search for common ground and reasonable consensus.”

自己限时了,但是超时三分钟.郁闷中!!!
而且自己越看越不顺,希望师兄师姐们心情的拍啊,我也争取天天回拍. 在寄托版第一次发贴,见谅见谅.
What is the true goal of politics? Many people argue that for several centuries, butbut从何而来，没有提出要反驳的论调啊 my insisting on that the goal of politics should not be pursuit of an ideal, but rather the search for common ground and reasonable consensus.这个开头比较难看了，基本上是具空架子。只是照抄了一下原题，语言上没有变化，也没有对自己的下文有个简单的概括。
段落之间要空一行。无论在版上发文还是将来考试，都是这个格式
You see, the politicians often promise all the voters who support them that they should give them some benefits which they want if they balance the ballots to them. But they seldom keep their promise even many of them forget what they have promised from their standing for the political stage on. So all of the promises are only an ideal to the voters. This kind of the ideal will make the politic much less effectively effective and eliminate the image of the government or the party in the society. Of course, there also are are also some politicians can do some thing something for the people or for the society utilities. But in another way there is no effective result too. We can suggest that Government should be consist of many people who are interested in people’s welfare and they will make many policies which point some good ideals in the future to be appreciate for the people. Without the expectancy, they often find they are well be averse to a prospect involving a small risk of a large welfare loss but a large chance of a relatively small welfare gain, even if the prospect implies an expected ex post utility gain. It is because that the “mental bad”, which come from the agony that the government suffer from when they try best to maximize the utility but being dare of the risk of loosen welfare, effect on the policy making. So the objective will be an ideal to the society forever as long as this situation exists. All of the distance between the perceived utility and the reality utility will make a negative effect on the society utility and make the government or the politics much more ineffective and idealization.
Of course, the only solution of this problem is that we must search for common ground and reasonable consensus between the political objective and the reality. For example, democracy is the most popular word everywhere, but I think it is an ideal to the society in politics. Now more and more nations think the word is a medicine which can give a better health to every people, but the situation is opposition, much more political puzzles surface out though the democracy solve many problems. We won’t depend on the ideal of the democracy that it will give everyone an authority to participate the management of the country. In my opinion, the essence of democracy isn’t the ideal what society it can make but the unite of the practice and the democracy objective. The final effective result which democracy can give the people just are three points: first, it can give people the autonomy; second, it can prevent the government abusing the power; last but not least, it can ensure the government deliver the public goods to the society on time. If a country can finish the three points, the country is a efficiency and effective, and those countries, having the democracy mechanism so-called, which can’t make the fundamental orders from democracy are only have an idealization perspective. Only are combine the political goal with the reality and searching the common ground and reasonable consensus between them the reality utility which the politics can produce.
The politic is serving the nation ,not a little people.....but not a little people, a group or a party. It is why what 删掉whatthe public be interested in is just the same as the politics. So the sagacious politics won’t pursue the ideal without any effective improvement rather than they will confront the reality and make good use of the resource in the society to produce the utility according the public interests through searching the common utility among the society, the people and the politics.


首先很吃惊第一篇就限时也能写这么多，看来你的英文功底不错
不过建议你还是先不限时写一篇。在这篇文章中还是有不少的语法错误，有些句子似乎也写得很随意，说实话我看得比较晕

tony_chaoUID: 187700

flyfish9
谢谢指点啊,我会继续努力的,你的那篇我看了,别人都拍得我无语言了,有什么新的必拍.

tony_chaoUID: 187700

再者我想请教一下,你觉得开头应该怎么写啊,我对文章中间的内容知道怎么写,可就是开头总是偶的弱项,开头总喜欢用绕句式描述一个意思?