Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

In a public-funded healthcare system, people who are willing to pay for the best and fast treatment should be able to do so. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? v.3

In a public-funded healthcare system, people who are willing to pay for the best and fast treatment should be able to do so. with this statement? v. 3
Rich people, for any privileged healthcare service, should turn to private healthcare facilities and the public healthcare facilities should equally treat the citizens regardless their wealth and status. If affluent people are given priority in a public-funded medical care, the poor would be deprived of their rights to get medical treatment and that is why I totally disagree with the notion that the exclusive healthcare in public funded system should be given to those who can pay more money. To begin with, a government has an obligation to ensure healthcare service for all of its citizens. If better medical services in a public funded system are for sell, it would only degrade the overall healthcare service in a country and symbolise a weak and corrupt administration. Furthermore, any public service, including healthcare, is run by taxpayers' money and offering exclusive services to rich people would create a backdoor for corruption. Similarly, it would deprive citizens of getting the service at all as rich people would start consuming the whole facility. With regards to prioritise medical service, only rich people can afford that and most of the poor cannot even think of getting it. So, only an autocratic government whose sole purpose is to make money and exercising power rather than serving the people would plan to actually execute such a detrimental and whimsical plan. Having said that, the private funded exclusive and expensive medical facilities are always there and wealthy people can avail this service for them anytime they want. This is why adopting money-can-buy-better-service in a public funded healthcare system is perhaps the step to destroy a fair medical service in a country. To conclude, health care is a sensitive sector and any policy that can reduce its overall quality of service should always be discarded. In my personal opinion, and I am sure it would also reflect the opinion of the majority in my country, prioritised medical service in a public funded settlement should never be implemented as it has a severe negative effect that would hinder poor people from getting healthcare facilities at all.
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rich
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
, for any privileged healthcare
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
, should turn to private healthcare facilities and the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
public
healthcare facilities should
equally
treat the citizens regardless their wealth and status. If affluent
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
are
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
given
priority in a public-funded
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
medical
care, the poor would
be deprived
of their rights to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
get
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
medical
treatment and
that is
why I
totally
disagree with the notion that the exclusive healthcare in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
public
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
funded
system should be
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
given
to those who can pay more money.

To
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
begin
with, a
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
government
has an obligation to ensure healthcare
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
for all of its citizens. If better
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
medical
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
services
in a
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
public
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
funded
system are
Did you mean "for sale"?
for sell
, it would
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
only
degrade the
overall
healthcare
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
in a country and
Possible spelling mistake. 'symbolise' is British English.
symbolise
a weak and corrupt administration.
Furthermore
, any
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
public
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
, including healthcare,
is run
by
Possible spelling mistake found.
taxpayers&
#039; money and offering exclusive
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
services
to
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rich
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
would create a backdoor for corruption.
Similarly
, it would deprive citizens of getting the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
at all as
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rich
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
would
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
start
consuming the whole facility.

Use "in regard to", "with regard to", or more simply "regarding".
With regards to
Possible spelling mistake. 'prioritise' is British English.
prioritise
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
medical
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
,
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
only
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rich
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
can afford that and most of the poor cannot even
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
think
of getting it.
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
So
,
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
only
an autocratic
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
government
whose sole purpose is to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
make
money and exercising power
rather
than serving the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
would plan to actually execute such a detrimental and whimsical plan. Having said that, the private
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
funded
exclusive and expensive
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
medical
facilities are always there and wealthy
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
can avail this
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
for them anytime they want. This is why adopting money-can-
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
buy
-better-service in a
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
public
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
funded
healthcare system is perhaps the step to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
destroy
a
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
fair
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
medical
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
in a country.

To conclude
, health care is a sensitive sector and any policy that can
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
reduce
its
overall
quality of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
should always
be discarded
. In my personal opinion, and I am sure it would
also
reflect the opinion of the majority in my country,
Possible spelling mistake. 'prioritised' is British English.
prioritised
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
medical
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
service
in a
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
public
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
funded
settlement should never
be implemented
as it has a severe
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
negative
effect that would hinder poor
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
from getting healthcare facilities at all.
11Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
42Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
6Mistakes

IELTS essay In a public-funded healthcare system, people who are willing to pay for the best and fast treatment should be able to do so. with this statement? v. 3

Essay
  American English
4 paragraphs
347 words
6.0
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 6.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.0
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 5.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Similar posts


Recent posts