Wt2 - please give me feedback

[nancy2710]

Foreign visitors should pay more than local visitors for cultural and historical
attractions. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

It is sometimes argued that tourists from foreign countries should pay more than local residents to visit important sites and monuments. However, I would argue that foreign and local visitors should be charged equally.

There are some reasons why I believe that both foreign and local tourists should enjoy the same charges for visiting cultural and historical attractions. The first reason is that foreign tourists make a significant contribution to the economy of the host country by spending their money on a wide range of goods and services such as food, souvenirs, accommodation and travel, so there is no reason for making them pay more. Another reason is that if travellers realised that they would have to pay more to visit historical and cultural attractions in a particular nation, they would perhaps decide not to go to that country on holidays. Consequently, there would be a remarkable decline in the number of tourists and a country could risk losing money they can earn from overseas visitors for the maintenance of these important buildings. For instance, many Westerners have complained about the overcharging on their holidays in Vietnam and they have blogged to warn others against travelling to the country, leading to a reduced number of visitors to Vietnam in recent years.

Granted that cultural and historical sites and monuments often depend on state subsidies to keep them going, which means that the local population already pays money to these sites through the tax system. As a result, the locals should be given priority over foreigner tourists by charging them less. It can still be argued, though, that the only way for a country to attract more overseas visitors is to keep the admission fees at least as low as those for local residents, thereby boosting its income earned from tourism industry.

In conclusion, I believe it is better to charge local people and foreign visitors equally when it comes to entry prices to cultural and historical places.

[Luschen]

Hi Nancy, I thought your essay was very clear and easy to understand. I think some of your sentence structures were a little too simple and repetitive though. - “The first reason is …”, “Another reason is …”. Your ideas though were relevant and convincing. I did not really like your second body paragraph.
The way it is written, it somewhat works against your main argument. Please see my comments for how I would suggest modifying it. Here are some additional corrections:

@nancy2710

It is sometimes argued that tourists from foreign countries should pay more than local residents to visit important sites and monuments. However, I would argue that foreign and local visitors should be charged equally. {try to explicitly state the extent to which you agree, as the prompt asks - completely, partly, somewhat?}

There are some reasons why I believe that both foreign and local tourists should enjoy the same charges for visiting cultural and historical attractions. The first reason is that foreign tourists make a significant contribution to the economy of the host country by spending their money on a wide range of goods and services such as food, souvenirs, accommodation and travel, so there is no reason [to make] them pay more. Another reason is that if travellers realised that they would have to pay more to visit historical and cultural attractions in a particular nation, they would perhaps decide not to go to that country on holidays. Consequently, there would be a remarkable decline in the number of tourists and a country could risk losing money they can earn from overseas visitors for the maintenance of these important buildings. For instance, many Westerners have complained about [being overcharged] on their holidays in Vietnam and they have blogged to warn others against travelling to the country, leading to a reduced number of visitors to Vietnam in recent years.

Granted[,] that cultural and historical sites and monuments often depend on state subsidies to keep them going, which means that the local population already pays money to these sites through the tax system. As a result, the locals should be given priority over foreigner tourists by charging them less. It can still be argued, though, that the only way for a country to attract more overseas visitors is to keep the admission fees at least as low as those for local residents, thereby boosting its income earned from tourism industry. {this paragraph was very confusing. It sounds like you are arguing that foreign visitors should not have to pay more, but instead locals should pay less! Hmmm … If you want to introduce the other viewpoint, I think it is necessary to show why the other side’s arguments are weak. You also need to make it clear that this is not what you believe, but what those unenlightened people who hold the opposite viewpoint have been led to believe. - “As a result, shortsighted pundits often state that locals should be given …” Then you could respond by saying that the local people get much more back than they invest in state subsidies, both directly by tourists supporting the stores, restaurants, hotels, and other businesses that the locals operate, as well as indirectly through the taxes such as VAT taxes or hotel occupancy taxes that tourists add to the government’s coffers. }

In conclusion, I believe it is better to charge local people and foreign visitors equally when it comes to entry prices to cultural and historical places. {add another sentence summarizing your arguments. Many graders do not think a one-sentence paragraph is correct}