Countries with a long average working time are more economically successful than those countries which do not have a long working time. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
40 minutes, 250 words at least.
It is believed that longer working hours make a country financially strong as compared to the ones with shorter working hours. (There is no need of writing shorter. Longer means comparison between different countries.) I
believed believe (think) that the economical (Economical is not the same as economic.) enhancement (A nation is never enhanced. Do not use inappropriate words in pursuit of using synonyms.) (economic growth OR development) of a nation completely depends upon the type of profession a person is engaged in (upon the type of dominant professions) instead of the working work durations.
On the one hand, in most of the countries working durations are longer. (Weak connection between sentence 1 and 2. How does research for days or years convert to longer work duration?) Research works in the medical field require
days years to invent and investigate new medications or diagnostic machines. In a pharmaceutical company of the USA, employees Employees of pharmaceutical companies work for 16 hours a day every day to create new drugs after experimenting them on various animals to ensure its their (wrong pronoun) safety for humans. (This sentence is not an example. Do not try to make it into one.) (Employees of different pharmaceutical companies work for more than 10 hours every day to experiment molecules/ chemicals on various animals in pursuit of inventing new drugs.) Since all this procedure requires money, it cannot boost a country’s financial muscles/ power monetary resource. Similarly, space scientists and astronauts explorers explore diverse celestial bodies and study on the probability of life on the moon. They live in space ships and endeavor (endeavor for what?) for several days or months continuously. (They live in space ships and work for long durations to discover any proof of water on other plants.) Their contribution is zero in economical the economic development of a nation. (They have a negligible contribution in the economic development of a nation.)
On the other hand, artistic professions entail few hours
to of work and contribute considerably in enhancing a state’s revenue. In a very short period, artists not only create unbeatable masterpieces but also earn handsomely in lacs. An Indian music composer and singer, A.R Rehman revealed in an interview that though during his struggle days he practiced really hard, now he invests only 3 to 4 hours of his entire day and produces extraordinary music. (… now he produces extraordinary music by investing only ……..) His music is admired universally which enhances his earning and, ultimately, uplifts a country’s India’s financial situation. (You’ve argued well using a variety of sentences. The logic is clear and it flows well with proper cohesion and lexical resources.)
To conclude, while some people doing enormous work are not contributors
in to the financial success of a nation, others devoting only a few hours in work are a huge source of revenue for it. The economic success of a nation does not depend on work hours but on the nature of occupation of its citizens.