In recent years, the increase in population together with the lack of space, has been driving the governments to build more and more Dwellings outside the cities. I believe that the two opposite ideas of limiting the construction in the countryside and allowing for building homes can be defended.
On the one hand, protecting the countryside from excessive building carries a number of benefits. All the benefits can be argued from an environmental perspective. Preventing the cutting of trees will increase the quality of the air since green plants act as the lungs of the Earth. The cleaner the air, the less would be the risk of human illnesses. Furthermore, if there are fewer houses in a region, there could be less noise pollution consequently. The reduction in pollution, air or noise-originated, is the main factor leading the workers towards higher job efficiency.
On the other hand, the option of building houses outside cities may be supported reasonably. Firstly, construction in less known locations will benefit people in terms of costs. By saving money from rent and bills, families are able to escalate their life quality. Improve nutrition and health are aspects of one's life the extra money could be spent on. Secondly, when fewer people are living and communicating in city centers, faster transportation might be achieved, and as a result, a society's economy can grow to a greater extent. The lower expenses of governments are caring based on less pollution in downtowns might add up to a country's economic growth as well.
In conclusion, the question of whether or not to build in rural areas seems not to have a simple answer, and many other factors are to impact.
In recent years, the increase in population together with the lack of space, has been driving the
governments
to build more and more Dwellings outside the cities. I believe that the two opposite
ideas
of limiting the construction in the countryside and allowing for building homes can
be defended
.
On the one hand, protecting the countryside from excessive building carries a number of benefits. All the benefits can
be argued
from an environmental perspective. Preventing the cutting of trees will increase the quality of the air since green plants act as the lungs of the Earth. The cleaner the air, the
less
would be the
risk
of human illnesses.
Furthermore
, if there are fewer
houses
in a region, there could be
less
noise pollution
consequently
. The reduction in pollution, air or noise-originated, is the main factor leading the workers towards higher job efficiency.
On the other hand
, the option of building
houses
outside cities may
be supported
reasonably
.
Firstly
, construction in
less
known locations will benefit
people
in terms of costs. By saving money from rent and bills, families are able to escalate their life quality.
Improve
nutrition and health are aspects of one's life the extra money could
be spent
on.
Secondly
, when fewer
people
are living and communicating in city centers, faster transportation might
be achieved
, and
as a result
, a society's economy can grow to a greater extent. The lower expenses of
governments
are caring based on
less
pollution in
downtowns
might
add
up to a country's economic growth
as well
.
In conclusion
,
the question of whether
or not to build in rural areas seems not to have a simple answer, and
many
other factors are to impact.
8Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
4Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
2Mistakes