To make our country better, government supports us some helps, welfare. (문장 구조가 어색하고 정확한 의미전달도 안됩니다. Support의 목적어는 us 하나만 올수 있습니다. 그리고 comma(,)를 찍고 명사하나가 달랑 나오는 경우는 콤마
앞의 내용과 콤마뒤의 내용이 동격일경우인데, 이 문장에서는 안맞는 것 같아요.) There are
two kinds of welfare; of flexible and universal. Each of these laws on welfare
has have
both good and bad aspects. (앞에는 단순히 welfare의 종류가 두가지라는 것을 서술한 것이라서 these laws에 해당하는 내용은 없습니다.) Based on that information, I defend the
selective welfare than general. (주장을 나타내는 thesis의 경우 자신의 주장이 어떤것인지
명확하게 표현하는 것이 좋습니다. 일단 비교구문을 쓰려면 앞의 내용에도 –er 등의 형태로 비교할것이라는 걸 보여주는 게 좋고, defend라는
단어보다는 argue/contend등의 주장한다는 단어가 좋을 것 같아요. 또한, selective welfare과 general welfare에 관한 내용이 문장의 앞에 언급되면 좋을 것 같습니다.) Here are
some reasons that support my opinion.
First of all, unlike North Korean, our
nation accepts capitalism. We have to work hard
to get some things we want. Therefore, this law
makes us diligent and the country is being wealthy ultimately. (앞의 내용에 law에
관한 언급이 전혀 없으므로 this law라고 쓸 수 없어요. 그리고
뒤의 밑줄 친 부분도 be+ing형태는 진행형이기 때문에
ultimately라는 단어와 함께 쓰기엔 어색합니다. 궁극적으로 ~하게 될 것이다라는 미래/추측형을 쓰는 것지 좋을 것 같아요.) With this
case, I think the flexible welfare can bring us better results. If people get
benefits regardless of the stratums and incomes, members of nation could have tendency to be somewhat lazy.
Secondly, somewhat shame can give the
poor a will to work. Supporters of general welfare insist that the
beneficiaries of selective welfare will feel the shame and don't wanna want to
be pitied. This is true but I think the shame can be the impetus of working.
Because they don't want to be ashamed, they'll work harder to be independent. People have
abilities to make enough money without exception therefore the selective
welfare could give appropriate helps to the poor by providing fundamental
needs. In contrast, if all people receive the same benefits, the will of the
small income earners will be reduced.
In succession, notion that the millionaires
and the poor should have same benefits don't
make sense. The meaning of welfare is helping people to live in better
environment. However, the wealthy are living in the best state and don't need
to receive some helps. The people who really need that help are is the poor.
They are having a hard time eating and sleeping, which
are basic things of life. to eat and sleep
even those are basic things. Giving the
same benefits to the rich same as the poor is wasting money. The cost for
welfare would be more higher if it
supports all people in nation. The beneficiaries of welfare have to be only the
poor.
To sum up, the propose of welfare is nice because it can give people in need a better life. There are also a good aspect of universal welfare. For example, not only the poor but the general people who have medium incomes can enjoy benefits too. In addition, people who have law incomes don't have to feel shame with receiving the needs. However, I think the flexible welfare can induce the better results with these reasons. I hope all people have good lives with the appropriate welfare.
conclusion에서 전체적인 에세이와 반대되는 내용을 많이 쓸 필요는 없을 것 같습니다. 가능한 자신의 의견에 맞는 내용만 focus해서 쓰는 게 에세이의 point를 강하게 만들어주는 것 같아요.
Writing 0-30 Score Scale
Limited – Fair (13-20)
에세이의 흐름이나 문법적인 부분에서 끊김이 없어서 좋은 것 같아요. 하지만 intro가 약한 것 같습니다. 정확하게 에세이에서 말하고자 하는 내용이 무엇인지를 말해줄 수있도록 수정해주세요. 에세이를 통해 반대하는 내용이 어떤것인지 (예를 들어 universal welfare가 나쁘다고 말하는 것인지, 좋다고 말하는 것인지 등)에 신경써서 바꿔주시면 될 것 같습니다. 전체적인 에세이가 토픽에 잘 focus될 수 있도록 수정해주세요.
수고하셨습ㅁ니다.