Some parents, especially mothers, stay at home instead of working, and some people think that they should receive monetary compensation from the government. Do you agree or disagree?
40 minutes, 250 words at least.
a one of the most complex tasks. To look after children and provide them a better upbringing, many parents, especially women, have to sacrifice their professional career. Therefore, it is suggested by people that the government should be obliged to pay a salary to home-staying parents. However, I completely disagree with this statement. (The introduction is well-written.)
The first reason why a government should not give financial assistance to parents looking after their children is that a large proportion of government’s budget would be allocated to family affairs. If this
happened happens then the state’s exchequer would not be have enough revenue to provide necessary facilities such as health care and education. To illustrate, developing countries such as India which has have (which refers to developing countries, not India. In fact, there is no need of which in this sentence.) a large population and serious concerns like environmental degradation and illiteracy. If the government start funding parents for childcare then there will not be enough finance to tackle these grave issues.
In addition, it is a fundamental duty of parents to take care of their children and they
parents should not be paid to do that . B because , (no comma after because) this would make materialistic relationship between a child children (their can refer to a plural noun only) and their parents materialistic which would result in the erosion of moral and ethical values . As, (no comma after AS) as a child would be raised in an atmosphere where every effort s (every = singular) made whether it is for love or to perform any for work will have a financial value (AS and SINCE are used to construct a CAUSE and EFFECT relationship. “As X, Y” “X as Y”) (Parallelism – for love, for work.). Owing to this, grown-ups would demand monetary aid for looking after elderly people. Thus supporting parents financially for family care should not be encouraged.
Though you have developed the arguments logically, a large number of grammar mistakes will reduce your score.
In conclusion, as per my perspective, the government
could cannot (could reflects a mere possibility) afford funding every family and (who is getting paid for love? Subject missing.) getting paid for the love and care the parents give to their children is not beneficial for individuals and society as a whole. (The sentence is badly structured and does not convey your message clearly. You need to use NEITHER NOR construction to improve the sentence’s structure and build cohesion.) (In conclusion, I believe that neither can the government afford to fund every family nor is it ethical to measure love and care in financial terms. This may have serious repercussions for the society.)
Please subscribe to my Youtube Channel.
Contact me for writing polished and effective Statement of Purpose.
Contact me for Editing Services and Document Writing Services.