> > 2009-08-25 19:32:04, '' 님이 쓰신 글입니다. ↓
■ You should spend about 40 minutes on this task ■ Present a written argument or case to an educated reader no special knowledge of?the?following topic ■ You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant ???evidence ■ You should write at least 250 words | |
|
Topic : The government is responsible for providing national security and
infrastructure. Private sectors sould provide other services, like
education, healthcare and social security. To what extent do you
agree or disagree with the above statements? | |
|
In our society, the government and other non-governmental organisations, in other words, private associations are responsible for a lot of social needs.
There is a saying that these two sectors have different roles given. (There has been an argument about whether two sectors have different roles or not.) In this essay, I would like to describe my own view about this the issue.
One of the government's roles is to fasten national securities while
providing publicpuble infrastructure to citizens. I totally agree with the fact because government is the most suitable player in this kind of field. They have It has got huge amount of income made by receiving taxes from its peoplea nation. That's why they are afford to supply money necessary for any constructions of public facilities. Building infrastructure for the public food needs high technical instruments, great amount of energy and solid strong safety in case. Private organisations are not appropriate to undertake extensive construction programs. MoreoverAlso, national security should be taken care by government. Protecting a country needs great abilities as it deals with national force and denfensive system. These must be done by the government as it they has have got the best-qualified capacitiesconditions.
For the private sectors, they tend to be responsible for healthcare services
or education programs. I think it is better that these types of social services
to be provided by private entities. For example. encouraging free competition
among private enterprises, the quality of service and reach higher levels
as each of them try to satisfy citizens with best offerings. (It is because the quality of survice can be enhanced by free competition among private enterprises.) However, It is significant that those organisations must be under strict supervision and regular inspection by government agencies to avoid any
injustice or improperties.(주제와 관련이 없는 문장이라 통일성을 위해 삭제하는게 좋을 것 같습니다.)
To conclude, government and private sectors are responsible for
developing different fields in our society. Once more, I may emphasize that
government should to always exercise guidance over our society to prevent illegal and harmful activities by non-public entities. | |
열심히 하신거 같습니다!
계속 주인공의 단어를 바꿔주시려는 노력을 했네요.
하지만, 욕심만큼 깔끔한 글이 나오지는 않은 것 같습니다.
일단 주제가 어려웠던것 같고,
대강 쭈욱 내용을 잡아보면 이렇습니다.
서론 : 정부와 사기관이 다른 역할을 해야 한다는데에 있어 논란이 있다.
본론1: 정부는 이러이러한 일을하며 나는 정부가 이런일을 하는데에 동의한다. 돈이 많이 드는 일이므로 세금을 걷는 정부가 해야한다. 나라의 큰일은 많은 능력이 필요하기 때문에 정부가 하는 것이 적합하다.
본론2: 사기관은 이러이러한 일을하며 나는 사기관이 이러한 일을 하는데에 동의한다. 이러한 사회 용역은 사기관의 경쟁을 통해 발전할 수 있기 때문이다.
결론: 정부와 사기관은 서로 다른 일을 한다.
오히려 본론 1 에서 국가 안보나 기반 시설은 큰 일임을 강조하면서 이것이 정부밖에 할 수 없는 일임을 더 강조하는 것이 적합해 보입니다. 반례를 들어 사적인 기관이 기반시설을 맡아 버린다면....이런식으로의 부가설명도 좋을것 같네요.
본론 2에서는 위와 마찬가지로 저러저러한 사회 용역은 경쟁에 의해 더 발전 할 가능성을 주기위해 사기관에게 맡기는게 좋다. 정부에게 맡기면 이러저러한 문제가 있을 것이다. 라고 주장 하시는게 좀더 명확하게 의견 전달이 될 것 같습니다.
화이팅입니다:-)