In
this given set of materials, there is discrepancy between the view of the
lecturer and the author over the issue of a special tax on tobacco products.
With three cogent explanations, the lecturer raises objections to the alleged
advantages of it.
To
start with, the lecturer debunks the author's first conjecture since it cannot truly deter young
people from buying cigarettes. To elaborate
in detail, the lecturer claims that they will be supposed
to/more likely to use the
black market where they are able to purchase them with a relatively lower price.
This is in direct opposition to the author's claim that increasing a
tax will make young people unable to buy tobacco products.
On
top of that, the lecturer also indicates a dissent over the author's point on a
special tax. The lecturer sounds convinced that the author makes a manifest
error on benefits for environment since raising tobacco prices will lead
to the decline of overall revenue for the
government. This is because the sale of cigarettes will decrease. He adds that
it makes it difficult for the government to investigate to solve environment problems.
However, the author clarifies that a higher tax can help combat the
environment problems caused by the cultivation of tobacco with more money
provided from it.
Thirdly,
the lecturer goes to expound that the author's final idea on reducing poverty
is flawed. The lecturer mentions that it will result in disappearing jobs related
to in the process of manufacturing cigarettes due to the decline of the whole sale of cigarettes. This counters
the author's theory that the government will reduce poverty by using enough
funds from selling cigarettes with the higher price.
Good (24–30)
전체적으로 내용 정리 괜찮습니다.
첫번째 본문에 /로 표현한 부분 수정해주세요.
문법도 괜찮습니다.
수고하셨습니다~