Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.
Governments Should Focus On Solving The Immediate Problems Of Today - With A Free Essay Review
PROMPT: Governments Should Focus On Solving The Immediate Problems Of Today Rather Than On Trying To Solve The Anticipated Problems Of The Future. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
In contemporary times, every country is engulfed with disparate problems. Government plays an important role in responding to the problems, analyzing the current condition, implementing ways to solve the problem effectively. Thus to get to the root of a problem it is crucial to analyze the current problem, know the history of the problem, think about ways to solve it and prevent it from deteriorating into the future. Thus government should resolve present issues immediately.
In India, the country is facing a plethora of problems that started a century ago. Problems like poverty, illiteracy, underdevelopment, corruption, racial discrimination, famine, and drought. Some problems have been there for years and still have not been resolved. Even though the government has implemented many 10 year plans for constructing roads, highways connecting villages, five year plans for the eradication of poverty or illiteracy - they are all in vain. The country is still fettered in the deluge of these problems. So even though the government planned to get rid of the problems, they have not been able to fulfill the promises. Thus to solve any problem in India, government should look at the present problem and solve it exigently.
Illiteracy is a major problem and should be resolved immediately.The government should construct schools in every village and all remote areas, and hire teaching staff, and immediately solve the problem.The government should privatize education. Thus by getting to the core of the problem of investing in human resources, many related problems can be rooted out immediately. Anticipating a 5 year or a 10 year plan would rather be waste of another 10 years time, money and subsequent efforts.
People are very poor in India. There is a bifurcation of society as being either very rich or very poor. There are very rich people and extremely indigent people. The paupers sleep on roads. The lack of indispensable needs like food, clothing, and shelter are bringing doom to the country.The Government should exigently provide homes, food and shelter to all the people who are poor. The taxes collected every year should be used to construct free homes for the destitute, thus eschewing this problem. Unfortunately the efforts to anticipate the problem are mere hypocritical means to filibuster the problem and use government funds for their own personal means. In 5 years the government would change; so will the funds collected. Unfortunately the problem would aggrandize if an action is not taken to seize it. As soon as these two evils are eschewed away, many related problems would assuage and be solved.
No one knows the future, we live in the present time, so the only concern the government should have is to solve the concurrent problem rather plan for the time unknown.
A disadvantage to anticipate about the future is wasting the present time. People are wary about the future, thinking catastrophes might occur, and plan to keep safe, but problems like famine, drought, earthquakes, tsunamis are immutable and inevitable. Even though they plan, they cannot get rid of it. They will have to face the consequences and the suffering that is casts. So the government should not waste its present time, money and resources to anticipate the future problems; rather it should solve immediate problems of the country.
1. Your essay has a number of word-choice problems. This happens when you set out to impress the reader with the range of your vocabulary. It is risky to do that in a test situation when you don’t have complete mastery of the English language; you may end up only revealing the limits of your vocabulary. For an essay like this, only use words whose meaning is absolutely clear to you.
2. Read the instructions very carefully. You are asked to discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree, and explain your reasoning for the position you take. This instruction encourages a nuanced approach to the topic. The actual recommendation you are asked to discuss also obviously invites a nuanced approach. Obviously(!), sometimes it is a good idea to focus on immediate problems. Just as obviously, it is sometimes a good idea to prepare for anticipated problems. (I'm not writing an essay here, so I can get away with just saying that that stuff is obvious!) Your essay uses one example (problems in India) to argue that governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today. Apparently, you unconditionally agree with the recommendation. I'm all for taking a strong, principled stand on issues in real life, but in an essay, it is extraordinarily difficult to defend an uncompromising position. Even if you offered a hundred examples to demonstrate the importance of solving immediate problems rather than trying to solve anticipated problems, I can defeat your position as long as I can find one counter-example. One of the strengths of your essay is that it anticipates, in your final paragraph, this possibility. One of the weaknesses, however, is that it deals there only with the weakest possible objection to your position. Of course it is a waste of resources to try to prevent an anticipated earthquake, to take one of your examples, but solving the anticipated problems associated with an earthquake (falling buildings, interruption of services, deaths, injuries) only entails enforcing strict building codes, retrofitting existing buildings, and having emergency-response teams and supplies ready at hand. As presented in your essay, your position commits you to rejecting the need for such preparations.
3. Your examples ought to be specific, but your reasons ought to be general; in other words, a reason and an example are not the same thing. If you want to argue that governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today, then you need to do more than provide a list of problems that need to be immediately addressed. You need to make an argument about why it is important in general to address immediate problems before or in place of tackling anticipated ones. Your essay comes close to making the general argument that, if funding is limited, then money should be spent on problems that definitely do exist instead of on problems that may or may not exist at some future time. But for the most part your essay gets bogged down in assertions of what government should do. So, don't assert or moralize; just develop arguments.
4. If you want to develop an argument, perhaps the most important step is to develop the best possible argument for the position that is opposite to yours, and then explain what is wrong with that argument. This is really just a repetition of the recommendation implied in point 2 above, but it’s worth repeating.