Which one do you choose, bicycle or public transport? Cycling and public transit are two common measures to improve transportation in many cities. While better provision for cyclist could have positive effects on societies, I argue that government funds should focus on public transport services rather than supporting using bicycle. On one hand, using a bicycle for daily commute makes much benifits for people that no other transport could do. This is because riding a bicycle is like doing a physical excercise, so it would help to improve people health and to get in shape. Another reason is bicycle is one of the most friendly environmental vehicle which would not generate any emissions. Moreover, bicycle costs enough low price so each person can get one. On the other hand, cycling has some disadvantage that could outweight the advantages mentioned above such as slow speed and bicycle is unusable in a long travel and not to reduce the number of personal vehicles. There is many merits of commuting by public transport, especially in the big cities. Firstly, bus or train does ease traffic congestion, reduce emissions, cost less money than personal vehicles and allow passengers to relax. Secondly, public transit systems provide services for whole society. For example, disable people, the old one and tourists would meet such a difficulty when using personal transport (car, motorbike, bike) that public transports seem a best choice for them to travel. Although it has much benefits, public transports have some drawbacks such as low qualities and sexual crimes on bus and train. Public transports are necessary in many urban and suburban areas and I believe with the financial supports of government, all the problems will be addressed. In conclusion, both bicycles and public transport systems have its own advantages and disavantages but I think public transport systems are more suitable for societies in present.

Migration - Can any one check the mistakes for me? Metropolises are becoming increasingly attractive to most of people, especially young persons (or youngsters). Although large city is deemed as (are seen as) a better place to live but it also has some drawbacks. Thus, the governments frequently seek measures to advance city life. Urban cities can bring many potential opportunities for migrants to change their lives but it is never easy to be successful or simply live an average life. The main urban problems is that the cost of living is likely to be much higher than it is in a small town or village because of high-income level with high life standard possibilities. Another issue is that only qualified employees or applicants will survive in commpetitive job markets in big cities which means migrants could feel much stressful to find job. Moreover, as a results of migration, the amount of people living in cities increases significantly which causes many problem such as: shortage of fresh water, nourishment and utilities; public services are overcrowed; an increase of crime. However, there are various steps that government could take to tackle these problems. Firstly, government should place as much as important on developing provincial towns and rural areas so people will not move to find their jobs. For example, government ought to encourage businesses to invest in countryside by favorable policies. Secondly, all the residental buildings, hospitals schools should be built in suburbant areas that help reducing population overload and. To be more precise, rural people will access easily these essential services as well as urban people will have a chance to live in healthy environment. To conclude, the people who move to big cities have to face with high cost, competive jobs and lacking primary needs. To solve the problems, governments could do much more to enhance city life.

I try so hard, please help correcting my essay It is no doubt true that the majority of people desire to be happy (have a desire to be happy or desire for happiness) in their lives. The meaning of happiness is not fixed; instead, it systematically shifts over the course of one’s lifetime, so it is hard to accurately describe happiness. However, people can achive happiness with some main point. Happiness does not have a definite definition because it is an abtract concept which changes its meaning depending on personal feeling and awareness. For instance, in the eighteenth century, Vietnam is a backward country with most part of its population lacked of food thus Vietnamese people simply wished they could feed enough their children. By contrast, nowadays Vietnamese people feel fully fulfilled and content with different categories of needs such as healthy food, large house, good education for children, potential career,... In other word, it is imposible to explain happiness for all, but each person could define his own happiness by himself. Generally, two common needs that people should have to achieve satisfaction is being healthy and having a positive attitude. Firstly, people being a good health frequently meet better deals in lives rather than who suffer from disease. To be more precise, it is hard for people to be happy if they are illness. Secondly, people who have a positive attitude will live better than other do not. For example, when a student get a lose mark, he should find out what make him wrong and how to fix it rather than being upset and feeling disappoited. To conclude, happiness is hard to define because it is belong to how people feeling. I think that two main elements building the happiness is keeping healthy and positive attitude.

something about Hodor - the film character My bad feeling of Hodor who was dead in series film Game of throne on HBO last week, is similar with my impression for children, cats, dogs and all the pets we feed. Clearly, they are all the same: can't protect themselves, be naive and loyalty. The moment he sacrificed, I don't think he knew about what he was doing, just held the door as being said.

I'm learning to write essay, can you help me? Companies are frequently required to have the social obligations, besides its primary responsibility is earning profit. In my view, I totally agree with the idea that local companies should concern more about social issues, especially for the community in which they live, than simply making money. On the one hand, it is apparently that commercial activities is the most essential task of the companies, if they want to survive in a competitive world. Firstly, the companies have to cover at least its running cost such as labour and prodution cost, payments for buildings, utilities and overheads. Secondly, business profit would be spent on expansion and restructure the companies and in reinvesting activities to remaining successful. If the company were on low incomes, then they could not take the social responsibilities although they desire to. In other word, All the supports business doing for social will lose the meaning unless it is in good financial health. On the other hand, the businesses should not be ran with the sole aim of maximising profit whilst they have a wider role to play in society. One social obligations that companies have a duty to provide environmentally friendly products and services with the adorable prices. Clearly, corporations generated and maintained career for many people that reduces the unemployment rate, however, they have long been criticized for their negative effects in natural environment. So, companies have to address this problem such as to take part in locally environmental project. All the supports of business not only provide the improvement for society but also advance goodwill of the company as well as advertise the brand in community, while building sustainable and impressive businesses. To conclude, I concur with the idea that businesses should pursue both social responsibilities and financial objectives simultaneously.

can you help me with this introduction? There are some disapproval of government budget using for artistic work and considering if it could be spent on worthy cause. In my opinion, I disagree that art is less essential to our society. However, I also believe that the good policies and adequate money for art could make a development.

Can you help me with my essay? Three pie charts give information about water used in residential, industrial and agricultural purposes by three users San Diego County, California and Worldwide. Overall, San Diego and California consume the most water for household, while the whole world uses water mainly on agriculture. As can be seen from the charts, the percentage of housing water is covered 60% of total water usage in San Diago, one forth of water consumption is consumed on industry and almost one fifth for agriculture. California has its water consumption is devided into three nearly equal parts and human habitation purpose is accounted the most with 38% of total. The rest of the world uses 70% on planting, outnumbered the two remaining when it doubled a haft industry, not exceeded one tenth of total water consumption in the world is used for residential purpose.

the end of 4-years friendship ( can you help me with my mistakes?) My closet friend have already broke up with me after we have a fight. This time is serious, he didn't want to talk to me, or even see me. I tried to apology him but he didn't care, he just say nothing. It hurts me so much when I remembered the period we had together. I think that man is misunderstandable too, not just woman. The picture is just for fun. It was taken in 1960s in Saigon.

Many coastal cities are going to disapear State of global warming up, melting ice are more and more serious, profoundly affected countries having borders with the sea. Predicted in 2100, sea level will rise by 2m, enough to make many coastal zones disappear. The newest report of Massachusetts Amherst University published in Nature Magazine of Science says that melting ice in Antarctic is main reason for this status. Just the amount of ice in here will make sea level rising by 1m at the end of this century. The others in different areas will make a rise by 1m, 2m totally. Significantly, this prediction shows the much more serious consequence compared to the prediction in 2013 of United Nations. Robert DeConto, one of the reporters illutrates, the sea level is rising considerably every year. In the further duration, the sea level is forecasted to rise by 15m by MAU in 2500. “At that time, the world map will be re-draw considerably compare to present”, warning RD. Last September, NASA also warned about the whole world sea level will rise at least 1m, much more compare to predictions before. “Even if this predicted figure has decreased, the coastal cities would face with seriously engulfed risks. The remaining problem in present is environment policies, such as the way of reduce the amount of industrial emissions, the greenhouse effect. Sciencetists warn that if there isn’t suitable and quickly policies, the whole world will suffer the severe consequence more rapidly than we think. P/s: I translated the news from Vietnamese to English