In many cities, there are areas of land that are used as parks. With increasing population levels, these areas would be better used to provide more housing. Do you agree or disagree? v.2
In many cities, there are areas of land that are used as parks. With increasing population levels, these areas would be better used to provide more housing. v. 2
People have different views about whether government should replace parks with more houses or not. Personally, I do not agree that using the land of parks provides more houses, which would be better.
The main reason is that a area with high population should retain parkland to provide a communal area for many people who live in apartments or small houses without garden. Both the elderly people and the younger people can go to the park to entertain such as walking, doing exercise, playing badminton, …Besides that, they maybe meet some new friends and talk together, which make them relax after hard-working hours. Moreover, there are many trees in the park, so the air is fresher and health’s everyone are better. Parks are suitable places for almost people.
Another reason is that if the government provide more houses in a area without parks, people will face to some problems such as less job, pollution. For example, a city with high population will be polluted air and water more seriously. The amount of carbon dioxide emissions from the forms of transport and factories is increase so it negatively affect human health. Additionally, the high population is the cause of unemployment. The number of labourers is high, whereas the number of jobs is low, so someone has to struggle to find a job.
All in all, I think that parks should be retained to bring us more benefits.
People
have
different
views about whether
government
should replace
parks
with more
houses
or not.
Personally
, I do not
agree
that using the land of
parks
provides more
houses
, which would be better.
The main reason is that
a
area with
high
population should retain parkland to provide a communal area for
many
people
who
live
in apartments or
small
houses
without garden. Both the elderly
people
and the younger
people
can go to the
park
to entertain such as walking, doing exercise, playing badminton, …
Besides
that, they maybe
meet
some
new friends and talk together, which
make
them relax after
hard
-working hours.
Moreover
, there are
many
trees in the
park
,
so
the air is fresher and health’s everyone
are
better.
Parks
are suitable places for almost
people
.
Another reason is that if the
government
provide more
houses
in
a
area without
parks
,
people
will face to
some
problems such as less job, pollution.
For example
, a city with
high
population will
be polluted
air and water more
seriously
. The amount of carbon dioxide emissions from the forms of transport and factories is increase
so
it
negatively
affect
human health.
Additionally
, the
high
population is the cause of unemployment. The number of
labourers
is
high
, whereas the number of jobs is low,
so
someone
has to
struggle to find a job.
All in all, I
think
that
parks
should
be retained
to bring us more benefits.
4Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
20Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
6Mistakes