May 23, 2020 at 4:39 pm #286520
Ta ngoc thanh tamParticipant
It is argued that the countryside should be preserved its original beauty and not be constructed more houses. In my opinion, I agree and disagree with this statement for following points of view.
On the one hand, I contend that lands is suburbs should share burdens of residents’ settlement with metropolises. Due to high construction density in cities, there is increasing number of people choosing to live in high-rise apartments, which are said about expensive expenditures but lower quality of life. Meanwhile, the nearby countryside is likely to be covered by fields and trees. An example of this clear disparity is a current situation in Ho Chi Minh City and its extramural areas. Besides, whilst cities are facing many controversial issues, such as air pollution and traffic congestion, the countryside seems to be a better place to settle in terms of fresh air, spacious live space and especially reasonable costs of basic needs.
On the other hand, the nature conservation is likely to be a reason why people should keep wild area as their origin. By involving a diversity of flora and fauna, the countryside play an integral part in producing green areas to countries. Indeed, this important role should be protected by governments in order to solve the climate change, a serious problem in the world in recent years. Apart from that, megacities are generally center of industry, commerce and finance, when a majority of lands in suburbs are used for agriculture. If people break this division, there would be no farms, leading possible the food shortage.
The long and the short of this, while I state that the countryside can be built more homes, I believe that there are indisputable reasons why not constructing in these areas.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Em mới chỉ học khóa Writing nên chỉ thích Writing thôi ạ, Các video rất đầy đủ các dạng bài thi nên em thấy rất hữu ích. Thích nhất là có phần chữa bài cả writing lẫn speaking.