ip.chuawriting
Post bài mới
Thành viên với 10 points trở lên sẽ được sửa bài bởi Team Writing 7.5 từ IELTS Planet - Học IELTS Online.
Bắt đầu nhận xét ở mục "Bài chưa có góp ý" để bắt đầu kiếm point nhé.

2,027 Bài viết

2,825 Góp ý

1,914 bình luận

12,890 thành viên

Some people consider that goverments should provide assisstance for all kinds of artists, e.g.: painters, musicians, and poets, while others think that this kind of support is a waste of money.

Some people consider that goverments should provide assisstance for all kinds of artists, e.g.: painters, musicians, and poets, while others think that this kind of support is a waste of money.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

People have different view about the assisstance of governments for artists. While numerous people believe that the support of goverments is necessary, from my perspective, it is a waste of financial sources.

At the outset, the major reason why goverments should offer finacial assisstance to artists is that it aims to maintain their live. In fact, individuals who work in art-related fields have difficulty earning a livelihood by arts, particularly in employment and income. In the period of economic cirsis, the majority of people has been busy for making a living instead of paying attention to the spiritual life, resulting in having less time for arts. As a result, works of arts would bring insufficient income for artists because their art products can be sold widely. For example, in Vietnam, a handful of singlers tend to shift to other works in order to have an extra source of income whereas a group of artists working in state-owned organizations have been calling for increasing salary.

Despite of aforementioned arguments, in my opinion, the intervention of goverments in supporting for artists is a waste of budget. A compelling reason for this is that the creative in work of artists tend to reduce gradually. An artist dedicated to the profession will certainly generate valuable works of arts which draw more attention in the public. Therefore what they would receive is the assisstance from the public in order to pursue the career and to serve the community. On the other hand, when the artists rely on the aid programme from the government, they are likely to lack of motivation for overcoming difficulty.

In conclusion, although some people claim that goverments should help artists by finacial aid, I argue that it is unessential. 

Theo bạn, bài viết này được bao nhiêu "chấm" ?
đã hỏi 18 Tháng 10 trong Discussion bởi marioshop (64 điểm)
share bài về Wall để xem lại ===>

Xin vui lòng đăng nhập hoặc đăng ký để góp ý bài viết này.

3 góp ý

0 phiếu

People have different views about the assisstance of governments for artists. While numerous people believe that the support of goverments is necessary, from my perspective, it is a waste of financial sources. resources.

At the outset, the major reason why goverments should offer finacial assisstance to artists is that it aims to maintain their lives. In fact, individuals who work in art-related fields have difficulty earning a livelihood by arts, particularly in employment and income. In the age period of economic cirsis, the majority of people has been busy for making a living instead of paying attention to the spiritual life, resulting in having less time for arts. As a result, works of arts would bring insufficient income for artists because their art products cannot be sold widely. For example, in Vietnam, a handful of singers tend had to shift to other works in order to have an extra source of income whereas a group of artists working in state-owned organizations have been calling for increasing salary.

Despite of aforementioned arguments, in my opinion, the intervention of goverments in supporting for artists is a waste of budget. A compelling reason for this is that the creativity in the work of artists tend to reduce gradually. An artist dedicated to the profession will certainly generate valuable works of arts which draw more attention from the public. Therefore what they would receive is the assisstance from the public in order to pursue the career and to serve the community. On the other hand, when the artists rely on the aid programme from the government, they are likely to lack of motivation for overcoming difficulty.

In conclusion, although some people claim that goverments should help artists by finacial aid, I argue that it is unessential. 

Theo bạn, bài viết này được bao nhiêu "chấm" ?
đã góp ý 20 Tháng 10 bởi HTD (35 điểm)
0 phiếu
Chào bạn

Đây là chuyên mục chữa bài miễn phí cho các thành viên trên có 10 points - Tài trợ IELTS PLANET         

Bạn follow bài chữa tại link dưới nhé (Note: để xem bài chữa, bạn đăng ký 1 tài khoản miễn nhé,  và lưu ý thời gian đưa bài lên forum - thời gian chữa bài 1 - 2 ngày:3 )

Link: http://ieltsplanet.info/forums/topic/discuss-both-views-and-give-your-opinion-18/
Theo bạn, bài viết này được bao nhiêu "chấm" ?
đã góp ý 20 Tháng 10 bởi tranthanh10080 (91 điểm)
0 phiếu

Some people consider that goverments should provide assisstance for all kinds of artists, e.g.: painters, musicians, and poets, while others think that this kind of support is a waste of money.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

People have different views about the assisstance ( mình nghĩ nên paraphrase bằng synonym như support cho đỡ lặp đề bài ) of governments for artists. While numerous people believe that the support of goverments is necessary, from my perspective, it is a waste of financial sources.

At the outset, the major reason why goverments should offer finacial assisstance to artists is that it aims to maintain their lives. In fact, individuals who work in art-related fields have difficulty earning a livelihood by arts, particularly in employment and income. In the period of economic cirsis crisis ( chắc type nhầm nek ^^), the majority of people has been busy for making a living instead of paying attention to the spiritual life, resulting in having less time for arts. As a result, works of arts would bring insufficient income for artists because their art products can be sold widely. For example, in Vietnam, a handful of singlers ( do you mean singers? ) tend to shift to other works in order to have an extra source of income whereas a group of artists working in state-owned organizations have has been calling for an increasing salary.

=> cá nhân mình thấy phần này hơi bị lặp ý, bạn nên thêm 1 số linking phrase kiểu first, second cho người đọc thấy idea của bạn clear hơn ý với cả sẽ ăn điểm coherence and cohesion 

Despite of aforementioned arguments, in my opinion, the intervention of goverments in supporting for artists is a waste of budget. A compelling reason for this is that the creative creativity in work of artists tends to reduce gradually. An artist dedicated to their profession will certainly generate valuable works ( nghe hơi bị unnatural 1 tẹo, bạn có thể lên freecollocation.com tham khảo cách dùng từ mình thấy khá là useful ) of arts which draw more attention in of the public. Therefore, what they would receive is the assisstance from the public in order to pursue the career and to serve the community. On the other hand, when the artists rely on the aid programme from the government, they are likely to lack of motivation for overcoming difficulty.

In conclusion, although some people claim that goverments should help artists by finacial aid, I argue that it is unessential. 

Theo bạn, bài viết này được bao nhiêu "chấm" ?
đã góp ý 21 Tháng 10 bởi phgchi2102 (9 điểm)

Tips: Thành viên với 10 points trở lên sẽ được sửa bài bởi Team Writing 7.5 :)
Bắt đầu nhận xét ở mục "Bài chưa có góp ý" để bắt đầu kiếm point nhé :)

Tham khảo các bài viết tương tự

...