https://t.me/EDUStatbot?start=poll_8_1174

Take risks in your life :

If you win, you can lead !
If you lose, you can guide!

Huddi shu kursni biz 300 000 dan o'tamiz. Lichkaga yozing :)

The maps show layouts of one city called Lakeside, before and after its redevelopment 9 years apart, in 2000 and 2009. Overall, Lakeside experienced significant alterations and became more modern and visitor friendly, with the introduction of new facilities…

The maps show layouts of one city called Lakeside, before and after its redevelopment 9 years apart, in 2000 and 2009. Overall, Lakeside experienced significant alterations and became more modern and visitor friendly, with the introduction of new facilities such as car park, cinema and shopping centre. It is also clear that these changes come at the expanse of some of the existed features.

In 2000, Lakeside was somewhat an industrial area without many modern facilities. There was a river that ran from south to north, with an industrial complex and residential area just below it. Across from the lake were old town and derelict house, while the school stood in the middle. The remaining facility was an art centre, which was flanked by residential areas to its south and north.

By 2009, Lakeside had undergone a complete makeover. The lake shrank in size and turned into a pond, whereas industrial complex was expanded, requiring the removal of one of the residential areas on the bottom right-hand corner of the map. Derelict house was demolished to make way for a new car park, making it easier for people with private cars. Another notable change was the construction of offices and a university in place of old town. Moreover, old art centre was repurposed into a cinema, with the residential area to the south of it being converted into a shopping centre, further reducing the number of residential areas. Lastly, residential area, which stood in the top left-hand corner, and a school were left untouched.

254 words

Assalomu alaykum 21:00 da bitta grammar dars oʻtamiz. Koʻp odam keremas, oʻzimizi uzkiy krug yetadi. Kim men bilan? + qoldiramiz.

Housing is a basic necessity for everyone. Therefore, government should provide free housing for people who cannot afford to pay it.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Housing is a fundamental necessity, and some argue that governments should take responsibility for supplying the underprivileged with free housing. While I acknowledge the potential benefits of this approach, I believe its implementation would put a significant strain on public finances and risk fostering a culture of dependency.

Admittedly, every individual has a fundamental right to secure housing, making it government’s responsibility to ensure access to this necessity. Providing housing promotes social equity and justice by addressing disparities and fostering inclusivity. With access to stable housing, individuals can redirect their time and energy towards advancing their education and securing employment, enabling them to improve their socio-economic standing without the constant burden of worrying about shelter.

Notwithstanding, I remained convinced that free housing programs are not a holistic approach. First and foremost, providing free housing puts a strain on government budgets, therefore requiring substantial public funding and potentially leading to higher taxes. This financial burden may also force the reallocation of resources from critical services such as education and healthcare. Moreover, implementing such programs on a large scale is likely to compromise other long-term development projects that benefit societies as whole.

Furthermore, free housing may inadvertently create a dependency culture. When disadvantaged individuals rely on government aid for housing, it can weaken their motivation to take initiative and work towards self-improvement. This dependency not only hampers personal ambition but also places a long-term economic burden on the system. A culture of dependency can reduce the incentive for innovation and productivity, as people may prefer to remain in comfort rather than seek progress, knowing that government support ensures stability.

In conclusion, granted, providing free housing to those who cannot afford it can have merits seeing as it promotes social equality and offer individuals the chance to lead a better life, I still believe such programs are not entirely desirable, as they pose economic challenges due to the need for substantial funding and foster a dependency culture, which discourages people from striving to contribute meaningfully to society’s progress and development.

337 words.
Edited with the help of ChatGPT

Achievement

23 months without fizzy drinks ☘️

5 full months of the gym sessions. No skipped session✅