The maps compare the same area in 2009 and in 2014. Overall, the area’s green and public infrastructure experienced some transformations, transitioning its focus from a primarily industrial zone into a more resident-friendly place. The road system, however, was kept unchanged.

Green facilities of the place underwent a notable expansion, with all the industrial objects previously occupying the center being replaced by newly-planted trees. A lake and several trees around it, in contrast, were left untouched.

Public amenities were another area of improvement. Adding to the already existing school, convention center, fishing area, residential building and swimming pools, a block of three houses, one more pool, a harbor and a university were constructed, enhancing social infrastructure. These additions took place primarily in the central, northern, western and eastern zones.

Meanwhile, the road network was not subject to change, connecting the south-western corner with north-western and further north-eastern. Footpaths at the center were also retained, with a new stretch linking the harbor and road in the west.


#essay

Public health care is becoming an urgent issue nowadays. Some people argue that governments should enact nutrition and food choice laws to improve public health, while others think that it is a matter of personal choice and responsibility.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.


Nutritious foods have been growing as a strong thread in the healthcare fabric of society, with some supporting mandating choices of such foods to make strides in public health. Other, however, point to individual liberty in this domain. While the latter belief does have some reasonable grounds, I believe the former bears greater weight.

The freedom of choice is one of the major arguments put forth by ethicists again the mandate of healthy dietary choices. They claim that exercising the right to choose or opt out of a certain food product is a prerequisite for a democratic society, so limiting it can be considered a societal downfall. On top of that, compulsory choices can also result in public resistance and potentially face public backlashes, if imposed nationwide and coercively. From an economic standpoint, this coercion is not well-justified, since income levels vary across regions in most countries, meaning income gaps can create a vicious cycle where the underprivileged may be deprived of nutritionally rich yet unaffordable, if so, food. Given these socio-economic repercussions, it is rational of authorities to avoid rendering healthy food choices judiciously grounded and leave them voluntary.

However compelling this view may sound, I am still convinced that legislative measures to coerce nutritionally optimal choice of foods are more effective. Not only do they ensure the timely implementation so that the prevalence of junk food can be reduced, but they can also bring about a culture where a nutritional value of food is carefully and thoroughly examined before the purchase is made. Putting this into perspective, these legislation reforms can be a powerful tool in reshaping dietary habits of the public, ultimately escalating its wellbeing. In some African tribes, for example, agricultural produce is the only food source during certain seasons, and their obesity levels are significantly lower compared to Western countries. This disparity can be attributed to the laws imposed by the leaders of the former party who, in pursuit of adhering to generational food choices, restrict the intake of anything but vegetables and fruits. Thus, the coercive policies in question can prove beneficial.

In summary, although the reliance on personal responsibility to enhance public health can be prudent due to deterred public dissatisfaction and democratic values, I side with those who support food choice mandates because of the potential, positive knock-on effects: less prevalent unhealthy foods and better-shaped dietary patterns among the general public.


#essay

T/R is sacrificed, but C/C, L/R and G/A are bolstered instead ⚡️

That is one way to elevate your score - give up 1 criterion but hit the rest 🎯

Bombastic structure 1.0:


📍In an economic context, where the mainstream industry being bound up to consumer behavior and mass production has become the norm, the rising similarity between countries can offer consumers a wider range of products and services and thus represent an economic benefit.


💥In the example above, the structure is there to explain the idea


📍 In a real-life context, where such ideas are considered utopian and marginalization of foreign ethnic groups has become the norm, the offer to preserve unique cultural heritage can make a big difference and represent a more sensible solution.


💥 In this case, relating to the current time goes through this structure.


⚡️So, the frame goes as follows:

In an X context, where........have become the norm,........and represent......

#novelty
#grammar