Search
Vocabularying
Listening
Reading
1. Academic
2. General
Writing
1. IELTSWriting Checker
2. IELTS Writing Samples
Speaking

Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.

Expenditures of Two Countries on Consumer Goods in 2010

Expenditures of Two Countries on Consumer Goods in 2010 7RJY

The chart illustrates the amount of money spent on five different types of consumer goods (cars, computers, books, perfume and cameras) in France and the UK in 2010. Units are measured in pounds sterling. Overall, the UK spent more money on consumer goods than France during the period given. Both the people in the UK and in France spent most of their money on cars whereas the least amount of money was spent of perfume in the UK compared to cameras in France. The biggest difference in expenditure between the two countries was on cameras. In terms of cars, the British spend about $450, 000 on it as opposed to the French at $400, 000. Similar to that, the spending on Books by the British was also higher at slightly above $400, 000 compared to the French who spent about $300, 000 on that type of consumer goods. In the UK, expenditure on cameras was just over $350, 000 which was more than twice the amount of money spent on the same goods by the French (which was only $150, 000). On the other hand, the spending on the remaining goods was higher in France. The French spent more than $350, 000 on computers whereas the British spent slightly lower than that (at $350, 000). While perfume tended to be the type of goods that both countries spent money on the least, the French paid out on that goods for $200, 000 in 2010, whereas the British only spent a little bit less than $150, 000.

The chart illustrates the amount of You use this word too often, consider replacing it withsalarywagewealthpaybillcash
money
You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 on five This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:various
different
 types of consumer You use this word too often, consider replacing it withequipmentpropertyfurnishingsfurniture
goods
 (cars, computers, books, perfume and cameras) in France and the UK in 2010. Units are measured
 in pounds sterling.

Overall
, the UK You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 more You use this word too often, consider replacing it withsalarywagewealthpaybillcash
money
 on consumer You use this word too often, consider replacing it withequipmentpropertyfurnishingsfurniture
goods
 than France during the period This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :accorded
given
. Both the This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :individualsnationsociety
people
 in the UK and in France You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 most of their You use this word too often, consider replacing it withsalarywagewealthpaybillcash
money
 on cars whereas the least amount of You use this word too often, consider replacing it withsalarywagewealthpaybillcash
money
 was You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 of perfume in the UK compared to cameras in France. The biggest difference in expenditure between the two countries was on cameras.

In terms of cars, the British spend about $450, 000 on it as opposed to the French at $400, 000. Similar to that, the spending on Books by the British was also
 higher at slightly
 above $400, 000 compared to the French who You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 about $300, 000 on that type of consumer You use this word too often, consider replacing it withequipmentpropertyfurnishingsfurniture
goods
. In the UK, expenditure on cameras was This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:merely
just
 over $350, 000 which was more than twice the amount of You use this word too often, consider replacing it withsalarywagewealthpaybillcash
money
You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 on the same You use this word too often, consider replacing it withequipmentpropertyfurnishingsfurniture
goods
 by the French (which was This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :exclusively
only
 $150, 000).

On the other hand
, the spending on the remaining You use this word too often, consider replacing it withequipmentpropertyfurnishingsfurniture
goods
 was higher in France. The French You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 more than $350, 000 on computers whereas the British You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
slightly
 lower than that (at $350, 000). While perfume tended to be the type of You use this word too often, consider replacing it withequipmentpropertyfurnishingsfurniture
goods
 that both countries You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
You use this word too often, consider replacing it withsalarywagewealthpaybillcash
money
 on the least, the French paid out on that You use this word too often, consider replacing it withequipmentpropertyfurnishingsfurniture
goods
 for $200, 000 in 2010, whereas the British This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :exclusively
only
You use this word too often, consider replacing it withwastedfinisheduseddeadlost
spent
 a Reduce redundancy by using "little" or "bit".littlebit
little bit
 less than $150, 000. 