Free Essay Reviews is a free education resource for students who want help writing college essays.

SIGN UP to post your essay and get expert feedback from a professor.

Recent Essays

February 17

December 10

August 16

August 16

August 16

August 16

August 16

August 16

August 16

August 16
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.
GRE Issue19: 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.”

Should the governments address the immediate problems rather than try to solve the anticipated problems of the future? In my view, the governments' responsibility is to assure the general welfare of the public which emphasizes a long-term plan unless the immediate problem is so crucial that it has to be solved in time.

Firstly, what we have to admit is that the ever-changing world and the demands of the citizen require the governments to solve the immediate problems. As we all know, people always prefer health to death, peace to war and being nourished to starving. And, they care more about now than the future, especially in urgent situations. One apt illustration can demonstrate it. In 2009, there was an outbreak in China of the infectious disease called H1N1. At that time, governments and offices paid less attention to other things around and placed this in the foremost position. The reason is that nothing can be more important than people's lives. Thus, if governments emphasize these crucial current problems before long-term plans, there would be less complaints and blames.

However, even though we have figured out how necessary it is for governments to solve the immediate problems, by no means is it still reasonable for us to ignore the significant function to found a long-term goal. To support this point, here comes another simple example. Currently, the supply of the petrol can meet our needs, however, what is known to us all is that we may face a shortage of energy and fuel some day. Under the pressure from the demands and the rise in the oil price, the response from the government can be useful to an energy-insufficient country. Governments can build a more intimate relationship with the petroleum exploration countries, officials also can fund exploiting new energy sources in order to compensate for the demands from our later generations. In a word, when it comes to realms like education, wars, medicine and resources, governments should implement long-term programs to well prepare for the challenge.

Also, sometimes, things may not go too extreme. The current problems are not totally separate from the anticipated challenges, especially when it links to the general welfare and long-term strategies of the society. Sometimes a fund for a scientific program may lead to a breakthrough linked to the development of the society and the benefits of our later periods; laws drawn up by the congress to prohibit from crashing and killing the wild animals may ensure our later generation survives together with a variety of the creatures. In short, greatness is in trifles. Some enduring trouble can be a sign of the catastrophe or the blasting fuse of the events in the future. We should figure out the relationship between the two and ultimately solve the problems to benefit both society and public.

All in all, the essential responsibility of governments is to meet people's demands and satisfy citizens' interests. Whether or not to focus on the issues at present depends on how urgent it is. In addition, the most important thing we need to make sure is that, the anticipated problems, if ignored, are more likely to cause great loss for the society.



Your first argument is that the demands of citizens require governments to solve the immediate problems. This seems to me an odd way of making what is essentially an ethical argument. The general form of the argument would seem to be that governments need to focus on addressing immediate problems in times of emergency, such as an epidemic. That’s what your example and your reason (nothing can be more important that people’s lives) illustrate. You can also argue, of course, that doing so is a way of meeting the demands of the people (which you can argue a government ought to do) but I don’t think you should begin with that argument.

Your next paragraph argues that we should not ignore establishing long-term goals. You don’t explain why you think that. Instead, you go immediately to an example that illustrates a way of establishing long-term goals. Your first task, however, should be to establish reasons for adopting the position you adopt, and you can then use the example to illustrate the reason. So articulate your reason explicitly. Note that the conclusion to that paragraph merely clarifies what you are claiming (it clarifies it by defining specific “realms” in which it is a good idea to prepare for the future); it still doesn’t not offer the explicit form of your reason for thinking that.

The next paragraph is the weakest paragraph because it does not contain an explicit argument about the original claim in the prompt. I take it the paragraph is intended to indicate the value of solving immediate problems, but you should tell your reader explicitly what you are trying to indicate.

Considering those three paragraphs as a whole, I don’t think they achieve what you ostensibly set out to achieve, if I can judge the latter by your first paragraph. Your conclusion seems a clearer articulation of your actual position

Best, EJ.
Submitted by: Joan

There are no comments for this essay.

Log In to post a comment.

About Joan