IELTS TASK 2: Should goverment spend its budget to preserve old buiding?

[paulthephoenix]

Some people think that the government should spend its budget on preserving old buidings, others think it is not necessary as there are more important matters. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Opinion differs as to how government budget should be allocated. While some may agree that the fund should cover present urgent matters such as infrastructure and accommodation, I strongly emphasize on the importance of preserving past value like old buildings.

It is understandable why some people may question the need to restore ancient houses while such serious problems as health care, infrastructure and housing of the city are not being well addressed. It is true to a certain extent that the responsibility of the goverment to improve the living condition of its current residents. As the financial ability of each country is finite, it is somewhat reasonable to assume most part of tax payer’s money should be used for improving their lives.

However, my firm conviction is that keeping old buildings intact is beyond any economics value. The construction could be a story from the past teaching young generations a valuable lesson. The historical value attached to the building can instil national pride and patriotism inside them. Furthermore, the investment in the preservation could turn those places into appealing tourist attraction spots. Had the capital city - Hanoi not spent millions of dollar each year to renovate its Ancient Quarter, it would not have attracted millions of foreign tourists. Those revenue sources gained from visitors could be utilized to mitigate the issues of the city.

In conclusion, while serious aspects of people’s current living condition should be noticed, I believe the care for old values such as ancient buildings should receive an equal amount of investment.

[Luschen]

Hi Paul, just like your previous essay, I am not sure the graders will like your format for the “discuss both sides and give your opinion” prompt type. Still, your writing is very clear, though there were a few somewhat odd sounding phrases here and there. Here are more details:

@paulthephoenix

Opinion differs as to how government budget {“how a government’s budget” or “how government budgets”} should be allocated. While some may agree that the [funding] should [only] cover present urgent matters such as infrastructure and accommodation,{“accommodation” really brings to mind temporary accommodation, like hotels - I think housing is better here} I strongly emphasize on the importance of preserving past value {“past value” sounds a bit odd - maybe preserving the past or preserving valuable aspects of the past} like old buildings.

It is understandable why some people may question the need to restore ancient houses {maybe use “residences” here to avoid repetition with “housing”} while such serious problems as health care, infrastructure and housing of the city are not being well addressed. It is true to a certain extent that the responsibility of the [government] to improve the living condition of its current residents. {this sentence is missing a verb - maybe "… the government lies in improving the living …} As the financial ability of each country is finite, it is somewhat reasonable to assume [the major] part of [taxpayers’] money should be used for improving their lives.

However, my firm conviction is that keeping old buildings intact is beyond any [economic] value. The construction could [serve as] a story from the past teaching young generations a valuable lesson. The historical value attached to the building can [instill] national pride and patriotism inside them. Furthermore, the investment in the preservation could turn those places into appealing tourist attraction spots.{“tourist attraction spots” sounds a bit odd - maybe “tourist spots, attracting visitors as well as their Euros.” } Had the capital city [of] Hanoi not spent millions of [dollars] each year to renovate its Ancient Quarter, it would not have attracted millions of foreign tourists. Those revenue sources gained from visitors [now can] be utilized to mitigate the issues of the city. {maybe add one more sentence to state that this shows that investment in historical architecture can actually be self-sustaining by generating even more funds than were originally invested. }

In conclusion, while serious aspects {I think you mean deficiencies or something similar} of people’s current living condition should be noticed, {“noted”, or perhaps “addressed” sounds better here} I believe the care for old values {“values” doesn’t really work here - it means characteristics like honesty or hard work, which don’t really directly connect with ancient buildings} such as ancient buildings should receive an equal amount of investment.

[paulthephoenix]

Thank you so much Luschen
Less than one moth to the exam, I really hope I could get a 7 so I will bother you a lot if you don’t mind.