Some people think that in order to produce a happy society, it is necessary to ensure that there is only a small difference between the earnings of the richest and poorest. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
It is sometimes asserted that creating a contented society requires minimizing the income gap between the wealthiest and the poorest. I largely disagree with this assertion, as pay parity can inhibit economic growth and equality even though social cohesion can be improved. The primary reason for my disapproval of limiting the income gap to create a content society lies in the potential economic downsides. When people are restricted from earning to their full potential, they often lose motivation to innovate and develop profitable solutions to existing problems. If Elon Musk had not been allowed to earn billions, the world might never have seen the rise of affordable electric cars, which are now contributing significantly to environmental protection efforts. Another reason I support not manipulating wealth distribution is the perceived injustice. It is undeniable that income should reflect an individual’s level of effort and expertise. Those who possess the right skills and work diligently for the development of an organization or a country deserve higher pay than those whose contributions are less significant. If highly competent individuals receive similar salaries to less competent ones, it could lead to feelings of unfairness and dissatisfaction. However, I recognize the potential for a more cohesive society when income gaps are reduced. This is because people with similar incomes tend to share comparable lifestyles and attitudes. For example, many citizens in Cuba reportedly display frugality and friendliness as they receive roughly equal earnings from the central government, leading to fewer divisive conflicts and a stronger sense of community. In conclusion, I mostly disagree with the idea that maintaining a small gap between people’s earnings is necessary for social satisfaction, as it can hinder economic development and represent unfairness in support of social cohesion. Therefore, governments should encourage innovation for wealth creation and allocate a portion of the resulting prosperity to support the less fortunate.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Match the prompt concept Original: pay parity Suggested revision: narrowing the income gap Why it matters: Pay parity suggests fully equal pay, whereas the discussion concerns reducing the difference in earnings.
- 2. Use correct adjective Original: content Suggested revision: contented Why it matters: Contented is the adjective used to describe people or a society that feels satisfied.
- 3. Use natural phrasing Original: restricted from earning to their full potential Suggested revision: prevented from earning as much as their abilities allow Why it matters: The revision expresses the intended limit on earnings with a more natural collocation.
- 4. Avoid awkward negation Original: Another reason I support not manipulating wealth distribution Suggested revision: Another reason I oppose manipulating wealth distribution Why it matters: The positive verb oppose makes the stance clearer and removes the awkward support not construction.
- 5. Fix the collocation Original: for the development of an organization or a country Suggested revision: to the development of an organization or country Why it matters: Contributions are made to development, so to is the appropriate preposition.
- 6. Compare like with like Original: receive similar salaries to less competent ones Suggested revision: receive salaries similar to those of less competent colleagues Why it matters: The revision compares salaries with salaries rather than with people.
- 7. Clarify the cause Original: as Suggested revision: because Why it matters: Because makes the claimed causal relationship explicit.
- 8. Avoid redundancy Original: divisive Suggested revision: social Why it matters: Conflicts are inherently divisive, so social identifies the intended type more precisely.
- 9. Use consistent wording Original: social satisfaction Suggested revision: a contented society Why it matters: This wording states the intended societal outcome more naturally and consistently.
- 10. Use measured wording Original: minimizing Suggested revision: narrowing Why it matters: Narrowing matches the prompt's idea of a smaller difference without implying complete elimination.
- 11. Use formal wording Original: downsides Suggested revision: harm Why it matters: Economic harm is more precise and formal than the conversational word downsides.
- 12. Refine the collocation Original: develop profitable solutions Suggested revision: develop commercially viable solutions Why it matters: Commercially viable expresses the intended profitability more precisely.
Suggested Rewrites
- pay parity narrowing the income gap
- content contented
- restricted from earning to their full potential prevented from earning as much as their abilities allow
- Another reason I support not manipulating wealth distribution Another reason I oppose manipulating wealth distribution
- for the development of an organization or a country to the development of an organization or country
- receive similar salaries to less competent ones receive salaries similar to those of less competent colleagues
Why this response received Band 7.0
The response maintains a clear qualified disagreement and supports it with distinct arguments about incentives, fairness, and cohesion; its range of complex sentences is particularly strong. However, it sometimes treats a small earnings gap as complete pay equality, and several examples or phrases are overgeneralised or imprecise. Address the exact degree of inequality more carefully and organise the ideas into clear paragraphs to strengthen both relevance and progression.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear position is supported by several relevant arguments, but parts of the reasoning address equal pay rather than a narrower earnings gap.
Engage directly with how small the income difference should be and why that degree would affect social happiness.
Coherence and Cohesion
The argument follows a logical sequence and uses cohesive language effectively, but the response is presented as one continuous paragraph.
Separate the introduction, main arguments, concession, and conclusion into distinct paragraphs with clear central topics.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is varied and ambitious, although several word choices and formulations are awkward, imprecise, or overly absolute.
Use more exact language for income inequality and replace phrases such as 'content society' with natural collocations.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A wide range of complex structures is handled with strong control, and grammatical errors are rare and non-impeding.
Polish a few densely constructed sentences so logical relationships remain exact as well as grammatically accurate.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
Some people think that in order to produce a happy society, it is necessary to ensure that there is only a small difference between the earnings of the richest and poorest. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.