ETS的满分作文AI，希望大家看看

laihong

Question

"People often complain that products are not made to last. They feel that making products that wear out fairly quickly wastes both natural and human resources. What they fail to see, however, is that such manufacturing practices keep costs down for the consumer and stimulate demand."

Which do you find more compelling, the complaint about products that do not last or the response to it? Explain your position, using relevant reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

Answer

The following sample paper would receive the highest rating:

Many people feel that products are not made to last, and correspondingly, many natural and human resources are wasted. On the other hand, it can be noted that such manufacturing practices keep costs down and hence stimulate demand. In this discussion, I shall present arguments favoring the former statement and refuting the latter statement.

Products that are not made to last waste a great deal of natural and human resources. The exact amount of wasted natural resources depends on the specific product. For example, in the automobile industry, the Yugo is the classic example of an underpriced vehicle that was not made to last. Considering that the average Yugo had (not "has," since they are no longer produced!) a life expectancy of two years and 25,000 miles, it was a terrible waste.

Automobile industry standards today create vehicles that are warranteed for about five years and 50,000 miles. By producing cheap Yugos that last half as long as most cars are warranteed, the Yugo producer is wasting valuable natural resources. These same resources could be used by Ford or Toyota to produce an Escort or Tercel that will last twice as long, thereby reducing the usage of natural resources by a factor of two.

Human resources in this example are also wasteful. On the production side, manufacturers of a poor-quality automobile, such as the Yugo, get no personal or professional satisfaction from the fact that their product is the worst automobile in the United States. This knowledge adversely affects the productivity of the Yugo workers.

Conversely, the workers at the Saturn plants constantly receive positive feedback on their successful products. Saturn prides itself with its reputation for quality and innovation—as is seen in its recent massive recall to fix a defect. This recall was handled so well that Saturn's image was actually bolstered. Had a recall occurred at a Yugo plant, the bad situation would have been even worse.

Another factor in the human resources area is the reaction by the consumer. A great deal of human resources have been wasted by Yugo owners waiting for the dreaded tow truck to show up to haul away the Yugo carcass. Any vehicle owner who is uncertain of his/her vehicle's performance at 7 a.m., as he/she is about to drive to work, senses a great deal of despair. This is a great waste of human resources for the consumer.

While the consumer senses the waste of natural and human resources in a poor quality product, so does the manufacturer. People who argue that low quality manufacturing processes keep costs low for the consumer and hence stimulate demand should look at the Yugo example. In the mid-1980s, the Yugo was by far the cheapest car in the United States, at $3,995. By 1991, the Yugo was no longer sold here and was synonymous with the word "lemon."

同样这篇满分文章，也不罗嗦。很少有什么套话。大家应该注意作者怎么叙述例子的，这一点对我们来说是很难的。此外，大家可以多看看阅读的文章是怎么写的。我们应该写得自然，不要做作，饶来饶去的，老外看不懂。

个人观点，仅供参考。

bobolu

确实是好文章！只是对作者的写作能力和临场反应能力要求太高了……我想大多数人不用模板在半小时内码出一篇好文章是不大可能的～

notsofool

很不错呀，没有什么套话，但的确对写作的人要求太高了。而且平时需要看很多的东西才行呀！

laihong

大家不要以为这样的文章难写，而是我们没有真正去研究怎么写作，反而去套摸板。

只要大家多多分析阅读就行

crystalwansui

laihong, 我看过了，可是这篇文章的结构跟我们一般人写得不太一样。

Automobile industry standards today create vehicles that are warranteed for about five years and 50,000 miles. By producing cheap Yugos that last half as long as most cars are warranteed, the Yugo producer is wasting valuable natural resources. These same resources could be used by Ford or Toyota to produce an Escort or Tercel that will last twice as long, thereby reducing the usage of natural resources by a factor of two.

这段为什么另起一段，他还是在说上一段的问题，把yugo的例子细化了，而且这段没有主题句。

还有，他的最后一段结尾，也不想我们通常写的结尾。还有具体的事例，这样写好不好啊。

另外，我觉得这篇文章好在它把道理用一个大例子分析的很透彻，让人信服。

我看平时的作文基本上中间写三段，如果写三段，每段写个小例子，就那几句话，好像道理说得不够清楚。而且考试还要现想，很浪费时间。这篇文章的作者很讨巧，用一个例子，把问题说得很明白。这个是不是给我们点提示，不是要旁征博引，而是要恰到好处，把问题说透彻，才可能的高分。

一点胡思乱想。

LAIHONG,来看看，讨论讨论

laihong

以下是引用crystalwansui在2005-12-23 17:32:00的发言：

laihong, 我看过了，可是这篇文章的结构跟我们一般人写得不太一样。

Automobile industry standards today create vehicles that are warranteed for about five years and 50,000 miles. By producing cheap Yugos that last half as long as most cars are warranteed, the Yugo producer is wasting valuable natural resources. These same resources could be used by Ford or Toyota to produce an Escort or Tercel that will last twice as long, thereby reducing the usage of natural resources by a factor of two.

这段为什么另起一段，他还是在说上一段的问题，把yugo的例子细化了，而且这段没有主题句。

还有，他的最后一段结尾，也不想我们通常写的结尾。还有具体的事例，这样写好不好啊。

另外，我觉得这篇文章好在它把道理用一个大例子分析的很透彻，让人信服。

我看平时的作文基本上中间写三段，如果写三段，每段写个小例子，就那几句话，好像道理说得不够清楚。而且考试还要现想，很浪费时间。这篇文章的作者很讨巧，用一个例子，把问题说得很明白。这个是不是给我们点提示，不是要旁征博引，而是要恰到好处，把问题说透彻，才可能的高分。

一点胡思乱想。

LAIHONG,来看看，讨论讨论

这一段就是对上一段的陈述，Considering that the average Yugo had (not "has," since they are no longer produced!) a life expectancy of two years and 25,000 miles, it was a terrible waste.这就是举例证明啊。在GMAT的阅读中也会这样写的。当然也可以合成一段。

姐姐确实研究很仔细，对于结尾，这些玩意儿，都是我们喜欢干的。而真正的写作，只要叙述清楚了，用得着重复吗？你看ETS的阅读有什么结尾啊？

还有举例，可以像这篇文章举一个。也可以写几个，但不管怎么写，都要言之有理。这也可以从阅读中发现。呵呵

laihong

Some observers argue that nowadays people become increasing respectful for others’ differences everywhere. In this view, they may point that people have regulated much more laws that prohibit the behaviors of discrimination and guarantee the implements of various people’s rights and in school students are instilled the ideology of equality and can acknowledge the nature of the divergence among human beings so that they would form the positive attitudes to the variance. Indeed, from this perspective, we can detect that people have made efforts to diminish negative weight of divergence among common citizens. However, they ignore some crucial aspects of this topic.

>>

Although the law that maintains the basic rights of human beings improves greatly and generates affirmative influences, we should never ignore that many such law itself is unfair for some portion of people. After all, the regulators of policy consist scarcely of the people who are being discriminated by others. Merely examining the number of Black or women representatives in House or other government agencies, we would readily reach conclusion the law can hardly stand for their essential benefits, or they may sacrifice some other rights in order to gain a kind of right.

>>

Ironically, the admission policy of some undergraduate or graduate colleges pays emphasizes on the afford capacity of international students when committees decide their admission, but seldom consider that of the residents. Such dual standards can be hardly regarded as positive signs of respecting others.

>>

In addition, the author does not extend his topic to the international situations. In Iraq, we have difficulty in judging whether the common citizens’ social status have improved since US controlled Iraq; and in China, the status of farmer, accounting for 2/3 of total population, is more inferior in recent years than before Year 1978 , when China was opening its door to world.

>>

Therefore, if we ponder this issue more deliberately, we would find that merely decelerating people become more respectful of one another’s differences everywhere sounds irrational, after all, this issue is so complex that it involved in great deal of matters。

这是我胡乱写的，见笑了。

ilikehiking

赫连勃勃

就冲最后一句，就不是一般人敢写的。

hitlzc

up!谢谢LZ!