Instead of training a few athletes to win medals at the Olympics, governments should spend the money on programmes encouraging the public to be active and stay healthy. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? v.1
Instead of training a few athletes to win medals at the Olympics, governments should spend the money on programmes encouraging the public to be active and stay healthy. with this statement? v. 1
The sport plays an essential role in the life of each person, thereby not only the sportsmen should be sponsored, but also all programs that stimulate the healthy life of the citizens. Therefore I partly agree with the topic statement because spending money on both sides of the debate has equal importance.
Firstly, few people can decline the fact that the win sportsmen increase the reputation of the homeland and they are an example for other citizens. For example, in the Soviet Union, everybody knew Sergey Bubka because he won the Olympic games, thereby parents encouraged all children via him to practice sports. Moreover, the Olympics game as other championship play a crucial role in the life of each country because prestigious, thereby the win there has a profitable impact on the future such country. Thus, if the government spent money on a few sportsmen which win, it could encourage other people to practice sports.
Nevertheless, the government should not forget about other sports programmes because especially public gyms need money support for providing better service for a cheaper price that is attracting more people. For instance, the government could open the huge gym, which is free or with the smallest price, among all private, with modern tools and professional tutors. Furthermore, some countries provide different sports events that involve all citizens and such events are popular among people. Consequently, some spending on public sports should be too.
To conclude, because of without money some sports programmes cannot be realised and win in the Olympic games unpredictable, so perhaps better equally distribute money between both this side of a country sports life.
The
sport
plays an essential role in the
life
of each person, thereby not
only
the sportsmen should
be sponsored
,
but
also
all programs that stimulate the healthy
life
of the citizens.
Therefore
I partly
agree
with the topic statement
because
spending
money
on both sides of the debate has equal importance.
Firstly
, few
people
can decline the fact that the
win
sportsmen increase the reputation of the
homeland and
they are an example for
other
citizens.
For example
, in the Soviet Union, everybody knew Sergey
Bubka
because
he won the
Olympic games
, thereby parents encouraged all children via him to practice
sports
.
Moreover
, the Olympics game as
other
championship play a crucial role in the
life
of each
country
because
prestigious, thereby the
win
there has a profitable impact on the future such
country
.
Thus
, if the
government
spent
money
on a few sportsmen which
win
, it could encourage
other
people
to practice sports.
Nevertheless
, the
government
should not forget about
other
sports
programmes
because
especially
public gyms need
money
support for providing better service for a cheaper price
that is
attracting more
people
.
For instance
, the
government
could open the huge gym, which is free or with the smallest price, among all private, with modern tools and professional tutors.
Furthermore
,
some
countries
provide
different
sports
events
that involve all citizens and such
events
are popular among
people
.
Consequently
,
some
spending on public
sports
should be too.
To conclude
,
because
of without
money
some
sports
programmes
cannot be
realised
and
win
in the
Olympic games
unpredictable,
so
perhaps better
equally
distribute
money
between both this side of a
country
sports
life
.
7.5Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
7.5Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
7.5Mistakes