Topic: Hosting international sporting events | Đề bài, bài mẫu IELTS Writing Task 2
Đề bài IELTS Writing Task 2 Hosting international sporting events: It costs a lot of money for a country to host an international sports event, such as the Olympic Games or football World Cup. Some people think that this is a waste of money, while others believe the opposite. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Tham khảo phân tích đề thi và dàn bài chi tiết dưới đây trước khi đọc bài mẫu IELTS Writing Task 2 Hosting international sporting events của 1900 bạn nhé!
1. Phân tích đề thi
Theo như đánh giá của thầy Nhật Phạm – giáo viên chấm bài tại 1900, đề bài IELTS Writing Task 2 Hosting international sporting events có độ khó ở mức trung bình và không có lưu ý gì đặc biệt.
2. Dàn bài chi tiết
| Introduction |
|
| Why hosting international sports events is not a waste of money |
|
| Why hosting international sports events is a waste of money |
|
| Conclusion & Opinion |
|
Many people are divided over having a sports tournament for international competitors occuring in their country. While some believe that money is wasted in hosting it, others believe the event’s benefits justify its costs. Although these justifications seem reasonable, I am inclined to express my disapproval toward this decision.
Organizing global sporting events might not be a wasteful venture. Certainly, new jobs will be created, particularly those in the construction and service industries. The former is expected to need more workers to build sporting facilities and lodging for the arriving athletes, while the latter obviously demands more hospitality providers for the sports tourists. Altogether, this results in a higher income overall for the population. Another point of note is that hosting international sports tournaments produces an opportunity to improve a country’s recognizability on the global stage. Such events, it is claimed, may leave lasting impressions in foreign visitors and allow a nation’s tourism industry to flourish for many years to come. The values created from organizing these events seem significant enough to justify the decision.
However, I firmly believe that a nation is squandering its wealth by hosting international sporting events. The expenses involved in such an endeavor, from lobbying for the rights to host to constructing sporting facilities, are massive to the point of extravagance. As a consequence, the home government incurs an exorbitant amount of debt, which ultimately falls to the taxpayers to foot the bill. After a tournament has concluded, meanwhile, the constructed facilities might end up a waste as well. This is likely the case for the host of Olympic-style events, as arenas and sports complexes for less popular disciplines fall into disuse. Even when they are used, the purpose is usually particular, and the public, as usual, has to pay for their maintenance. It is hence reasonable to oppose the holding of international sports tournaments.
In conclusion, organizing sports events for athletes from all over the globe is largely a waste of money, and can be one of the worst financial decisions a nation can make. Any government which likes to explore the possibility of doing so, in my opinion, would need a good reason for it.
Từ vựng
It is claimed that hosting mega sport events such as Word cup and Olympics are not economical for countries, it would be better governments allocate more money for other services for public. However, others believe that hold international sport events can have several beneficial influence on country. I totally agree that instead of investing on big sporting events, government should spend money on other services like education and healthcare. Additionally, because of poor economy climate that most countries face on, many governments have to take on huge debts as a host.
Like many individuals believe that hosting mega sport events are wasting money, I am of the opinion that the money spend on state-of-the-art stadiums and arenas would be better spend on education and health services. Many countries, especially developing countries struggle with insufficient schools, books, and teachers due to inadequate fuds that allocate to educational services. If government did not devote enough money them, the number of educational people would declined. Furthermore, If government spent money on Mega international sports, it would not had sufficient fund for healthcare systems. As good public's health is the greatest asset for government because if people suffer from poor health, government would face the lack of workers. Therefore, government should not favor highly publicised events at the expense of health condition.
Additionally, despite of some develop countries with healthy economy, many countries deal with poor economy climate. If developing countries had been a host events like Word cup or Olympics, they would occurred huge debts because of constructing top-of-the-line stadiums and hotels. There are many documentaries that wanted to demonstrate the other side of models. For instance, 'The Edge of Democracy' documentary described the condition of Brazilian people during Word Cup (2014) as well as Olympic(2016). It strived to depict how many Brazilian cope with poverty, despite of glamours events.
In conclusion, although many people claim that allocating money to international sport events is not fair, many believe that they can impact on country in a positive way. I think that government should advocate all their funds to educational system as well as health services without getting debts from other countries.
People have different opinions as to whether nations should spend the national budget on hosting international sporting events. Personally, I believe that the events have beneficial impacts on a nation.
Advocates of the former view might assert that spending on sporting events could hurt countries’ economies. Staging the international sporting events would incur enormous expenses, to the detriment of the host nations’ budgets. The expenditure on enhancing the infrastructure and capacity of their stadiums, implementing higher levels of security, and hiring performance artists is so significant that hardly can poverty-stricken nations afford it. For example, South Africa spent billions of dollars hosting the 2010 World Cup and then drowned in debt. Instead, those budgets should have been expended on addressing the physiological needs such as improving the standard of living and eliminating starvation.
However, I support the view that nations might reap a multiplicity of benefits from staging those sporting events. Firstly, A wide range of employment opportunities are available during years of planning and investment, and this will contribute to a decrease in unemployment. Secondly, enthusiasm and excitement are an indispensable part of these events; it is clear from this emotional boost that people of the host nations will experience a drastic improvement in their life satisfaction. Lastly, such events are conducive to the development of culture and tourism in the host nations. Social cohesion and cultural understanding are further developed, thanks to the get-together of people from all over the world.
In conclusion, I concur with the portion of people who believe that the benefits of hosting international events would outweigh the drawbacks, although it may dig immensely into countries’ economies.
The ongoing debate over the allocation of significant resources by nations to host grand sporting events, such as the World Cup, raises intriguing questions. While some view this expenditure as an unnecessary drain on national coffers, others argue for its potential to uplift a nation's international stature and economy. Personally, I believe that each nation's unique context and long-term vision should dictate such decisions.
Firstly, critics often point to countries where investments in such events did not yield anticipated returns. Brazil, for example, poured vast resources into the 2016 World Cup. Yet, the post-event reality was sobering, with many stadiums, notably the Arena da Amazonia in Manaus, becoming costly white elephants. Furthermore, while there were indeed profits, they were disproportionately pocketed by international organizers, rendering the direct economic benefits to Brazil fleeting.
Contrastingly, there are instances where nations have strategically leveraged these events for long-term gains. Japan's experience with the 2021 Olympics stands out. Despite initial apprehensions, especially due to the pandemic, the nation emerged with bolstered tourism and global goodwill. This wasn't mere chance; it was the fruit of meticulous planning and strategic investments that prioritized long-term national benefits over short-term showmanship.
In deliberating such grand ventures, it's paramount for countries to assess their inherent strengths, weaknesses, and priorities. For nations grappling with foundational challenges, such as healthcare inadequacies or educational gaps, resources might be better spent addressing these pressing needs. Yet, for others with the infrastructure and vision in place, such events can be a transformative platform.
In conclusion, the decision to host a global sporting event comes with its set of challenges and opportunities. While the allure of international acclaim and potential economic windfall is undeniable, it's equally vital to ensure that the event aligns with the nation's broader goals and aspirations. Given the multifaceted nature of this issue, I predict that countries will increasingly adopt a more nuanced, data-driven approach in the future, weighing the pros and cons before committing to such mammoth undertakings.
A number of stakeholders believe that becoming the host of international sporting events is wasting money and the funding could be used for other beneficial activities, while the other parties think that hosting large sporting tournaments benefits a nation. I will here elaborate on both opinions and mine regarding the said issue with due reasoning.
One group of people trusts that to be a main organizer of some big sports championships like the Olympics or World Cup would be a lavish program. To be able to provide the best experience of events including hospitality, accommodation, facilities and transportation, a country must take out their wealth in massive amounts. In addition, if that money is used for the greater good for example building many new hospitals and schools across its territory, it will improve the people's quality and capability.
The other assumes that hosting a large sporting cup has a positive impact for instance attracting international tourists to visit the host country. When a state held a gigantic competition, it would be broadcast around the globe so it would be once in a lifetime opportunity to introduce the nation to the whole world. Furthermore, the publication will not only cover the contest but will also cover the special characteristics of the state like the culture, food and people. Of course, it would be beneficial to the tourism of the country.
As for me, I think I would agree with the first group on their opinion. On top of their opinion, I would add another factor that to make the fortune could be spent on some great projects, the government must make a scheme where the money should be distributed based on necessities. So, when the budget is used according to the specific conditions, it would give astonishing advantages to the country.
To conclude, for a country that wants to host a worldwide affair, it needs to ensure its condition is in good shape so that when it becomes the main organizer, it will bring more benefits than drawbacks.
Some people believe that hosting major sporting events like the World Cup benefits a country, whereas others argue that it is a waste of money. I agree with the latter view.
On the one hand, proponents of staging large sporting events often emphasize its socioeconomic benefits. When a country hosts an event like the Olympics, it attracts millions of visitors, which boosts local businesses such as hotels, restaurants, and shops. This influx of tourists can provide a temporary economic boost and create job opportunities, especially in the service and construction sectors. Advocates of hosting such grandiose events might also add that it puts the country on the global stage, potentially attracting future investments and tourism. The pride and excitement generated by hosting such events can also foster national unity and improve the country's international image
Notwithstanding the aforementioned arguments/ However, I side with those who view staging international sporting events as a waste of money. The costs associated with / attached to organizing such world-scale events are enormous, including the construction of sophisticated sports facilities, infrastructure upgrades, and security measures. These expenses can strain / put a strain on a country's coffers, particularly in developing nations where funds could be better spent on essential services such as healthcare and education. For example, after the 2014 World Cup, Brazil faced widespread criticism for spending billions of dollars on stadiums that later became underutilized, while many of its citizens continued to live in poverty.
In conclusion, while there are justifications for supporting hosting large sporting events, I would argue that the investment in it is largely unjustified/ wasteful.
Xem thêm các tài liệu Tiếng Anh hay, chi tiết khác:
TOP việc làm "HOT" dành cho sinh viên
Đăng nhập để có thể bình luận
1900.com.vn tổng hợp bài viết về Câu điều kiện loại 1 (First Conditional) đầy đủ các kiến thức bao gồm: Định nghĩa, cấu trúc ngữ pháp, cách dùng, các ví dụ minh họa và bài tập vận dụng. Từ đó giúp bạn nắm vững kiến thức và học tốt Tiếng Anh hơn.
1900.com.vn tổng hợp bài viết về Speaking Forecast 2023 | Bộ đề dự đoán chi tiết mới nhất cung cấp cho người học một loạt các chủ đề, câu hỏi và phương pháp luyện tập để giúp họ nâng cao khả năng giao tiếp tiếng Anh của mình. Từ đó giúp bạn nắm vững kiến thức và học tốt Tiếng Anh hơn.
1900.com.vn tổng hợp bài viết về Talk about festival in Vietnam - một trong những chủ đề vô cùng thông dụng, thường xuyên xuất hiện trong đề thi thực chiến. Từ đó giúp bạn nắm vững kiến thức và học tốt Tiếng Anh hơn.