Mine
--Issue Topic---
Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists.
Reason: The surest indicator of a great nation is actually the welfare of all its people.
---Prompt---
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
---My Response Essay---
Welfare of all people of a nation could not be the surest indicator of a great country.
Although the achievement of the capable talents in the nation is as well an indicator, this or even the welfare are both too narrow to be the best index. Surely, welfare demonstrates certain scenes how people in the nation live. However, it is a concurrent status, which could not last long. For example, Canada used to provide unaffordable social welfare and end in dramatically shouting down some services in a rush. Leaving a great debit for the next generation of people should not be consider as "great".
A great nation could be great in many aspect such as giving births to all human beings, holding long history, helping other countries in disasters, or generating rich human culture, but none of these are of its welfare. For example, my country whose citizens donate highest in average to Japan in FukuShima event is highly respected by its surrounding countries.
Many more measures need to be took into concern to form a surest indicator while welfare merely is not representative.
[COLOR=Teal]
---my signature---
* my planed date to take GRE: Oct 19, 13'
* want me to comment on another of your essays?! Comment on mine and, in a deserved way worth how you revise mine, I will repond to one of your essay where other essays of the same topic have not yet commented by me. If possible, please post your essay to be reviewed in a new thread; else you could wonder if a comment is for your essay or mine.
* Comments on another's essay is itself an argument essay. I will formalize all
Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists.
Reason: The surest indicator of a great nation is actually the welfare of all its people.
---Prompt---
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
---My Response Essay---
Welfare of all people of a nation could not be the surest indicator of a great country.
Although the achievement of the capable talents in the nation is as well an indicator, this or even the welfare are both too narrow to be the best index. Surely, welfare demonstrates certain scenes how people in the nation live. However, it is a concurrent status, which could not last long. For example, Canada used to provide unaffordable social welfare and end in dramatically shouting down some services in a rush. Leaving a great debit for the next generation of people should not be consider as "great".
A great nation could be great in many aspect such as giving births to all human beings, holding long history, helping other countries in disasters, or generating rich human culture, but none of these are of its welfare. For example, my country whose citizens donate highest in average to Japan in FukuShima event is highly respected by its surrounding countries.
Many more measures need to be took into concern to form a surest indicator while welfare merely is not representative.
[COLOR=Teal]
---my signature---
* my planed date to take GRE: Oct 19, 13'
* want me to comment on another of your essays?! Comment on mine and, in a deserved way worth how you revise mine, I will repond to one of your essay where other essays of the same topic have not yet commented by me. If possible, please post your essay to be reviewed in a new thread; else you could wonder if a comment is for your essay or mine.
* Comments on another's essay is itself an argument essay. I will formalize all