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

Some people hold that we should spend money and time on the protection of wild animals while others suggest that the money should be spent on populations living in the poorest areas of the world. What is your opinion

Some people hold that we should spend money and time on the protection of wild animals while others suggest that the money should be spent on populations living in the poorest areas of the world. What is your opinion g5A2a
It is true that many people argue that people could waste capital and time on protecting of animals. Meanwhile, some people believe that we should spend funds on people who are poverty in the global. Personally, I agree with the second point. On the one hand, people who believe that we should spend money on protecting of animals base their opinion on several reasons. Firstly, protecting animals can help with regulation of the environment. For example, animals eat each other to making recycling nature. If they are dying, circulation nature would be broke. Therefore, it can lead to climate change. Secondly, animals can help to find kind of the medical in them. For instance, nowadays, experts use animals to test to find medical to treatment such as test vaccines in mouses. On the other hand, I believe that we should waste capital on poverty people. Firstly, spending cash for poor people can make a their living. Government spends fund to build new houses to people who are poor. Therefore, they can live a good condition and they can concentrate on working to make money. Secondly, the poorest people are labour and make country development in the economy. For example, government can create to jobs for people by constructing companies such as shoe companies or clothing companies. As the results, with development economic, a country can take part in market integration in the world. In conclusion, although both views certainly have some vadility, it seems to me that is is better to spending monney to poverty people
It is true that
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
many
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
argue that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
could waste capital and time on protecting of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
. Meanwhile,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
believe that we should spend funds on
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
who are poverty in the global.
Personally
, I
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
agree
with the second point.

On the one hand,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
who believe that we should spend money on protecting of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
base their opinion on several reasons.
Firstly
, protecting
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
can
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
help
with regulation of the environment.
For example
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
eat each other to making recycling nature. If they are dying, circulation nature would be broke.
Therefore
, it can lead to climate
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
change
.
Secondly
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
can
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
help
to find kind of the medical in them.
For instance
, nowadays, experts
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
test
to find medical to treatment such as
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
test
vaccines in mouses.

On the other hand
, I believe that we should waste capital on poverty
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
.
Firstly
, spending cash for poor
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
can
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
make
A determiner cannot combine with a possessive pronoun. Did you mean simply "their living" or "a living"?
a their living
.
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
Government
spends fund to build new
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
houses
to
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
who are poor.
Therefore
, they can
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
live
a
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
good
Use a comma before 'and' if it connects two independent clauses (unless they are closely connected and short).
condition and
they can concentrate on working to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
make
money.
Secondly
, the poorest
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
are
Possible spelling mistake. 'labour' is British English.
labour
and
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
make
country development in the economy.
For example
,
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
government
can create to jobs for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
by constructing
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
companies
such as shoe
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
companies
or clothing
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
companies
. As the results, with development economic, a country can
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
take part
in market integration in the world.

In conclusion
, although both views
certainly
have
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
Possible spelling mistake found.
vadility
, it seems to me that
Possible typo: you repeated a word
is is
better to spending
Possible spelling mistake found.
monney
to poverty
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
What do you think?
  • This is funny writingFunny
  • I love this writingLove
  • This writing has blown my mindWow
  • It made me angryAngry
  • It made me sadSad

IELTS essay Some people hold that we should spend money and time on the protection of wild animals while others suggest that the money should be spent on populations living in the poorest areas of the world. What is your opinion

Essay
  American English
4 paragraphs
255 words
5.5
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • 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: 6.0
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 6.0
  • 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
Recent posts