In many countries a small number of individuals earn extremly high salaries. Some people think that it is good for the country, but others think that government should not allow salaries above a certain level. Discuss the both views and give your opinion.
40 minutes, 250 words at least.
There is no doubt that many companies offer an attractive salary for their employees. While some people feel that these high achievers (while these refers to employees, high achievers does not mean the same.)
are inadvently (no such word exists. Inadvertently = unintentionally) improve the economy of their countries, others refute this view and argue that employee remuneration should be capped at a certain level by governments. I agree to this latter view. (Rephrase while mentioning reasons supporting each view. The reasons are underlined: While some people feel that this motivates employees and aids in economic growth, others think that this makes a society unequal and creates social instability. I agree to the latter view.)
The supporters of the higher pay-scale
sheme suggest that the economic status of a country is inexorably tied to the productivity of its citizens, especially, those who earn the highest executive salaries. To be precise, many multinational companies are able to employ the most talented workforce due to the huge sums of money that they are willing to pay. Because of this, these employees are not only working studiosly not only work diligently (use Simple Present Tense. Studiously = related to studies.) to augment their career status but also resulting in higher productivity provide greater economic output/ productivity, which in turn promote the overall develpement of a country. Software companies , for instance, (for instance = such as) such as Google and Microsoft offer an appealing wages to the best programmers who are working work (use Simple Present tense) in a knowledge-based economy. (The paragraph scores well on task response and cohesion. However, there are some serious grammar issues.)
faction of employees (Employees are not proposing this) propose that the government should draw a limit on payscale. According to them, the wider the pay-gap between employees and boss, the more inferiority complex among them. Moreover, these low-paid workers are prone to work place exploitation, and sometimes, even forced to commit crimes by which they can earn much more. A recent swathing report by ‘The Guardian’, an English Newspaper, revealed that one of the threatening triggers for crimes, which is accounted for 30 % percent (30 percent of what?), is low income of people (the question is on high income of a few individuals: … is the extreme income inequality in the society.). Therfore, so as to reduce the crimes and inequality, the government should enact a new law to distribute the salaries without descrimination. (This paragraph scores low on task response. This should be on “Why the government – and only government – should not allow salaries above a certain limit?” Please make GOVERNMENT as the focus of your paragraph. Sample: Conversely, others propose that hige income inequality leads to social instability and economic downfall of a country. They propose that governments should impose an upper limit on salaries of executives of all companies as there is no other way to distribute the wealth equitably. All other measures such as high taxes have been proved futile in capping salaries. For instance, France has recently made a law that prevents top employees of a company from drawing more than 10 times the salary of an average employee. This has massively curtailed the income gap between the rich and the poor.)
In conclusion, a handful of eneterprenuers are willing to pay a large amount of money to their
workers. executives. Although the economic status of a country can be accelerated through these high-paid staffs, I feel that salary should be limited at a certain level since it will reduce the crimes and prevent the workplace abuse.