Some people say it is the government responsibility to transport children to school. Others believe parents should transport their children to school. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Introduction
It is not a rare case that accidents pop up occasionally and pose a threat to young children on their way to school. As a result, there is the argument over who should be responsible for guaranteeing children the safety.
解析
双边讨论，谁应该送孩子上学。比较难以确定立场，需分两种情况讨论：家校距离远 VS 家校距离近
Ø pop up vi. 突然出现
Ø pose a threat to sb./ sth. 对…构成威胁
Ø guarantee sb. sth. 保证（常作褒义）
Body 1
Admittedly, government should, at least partially, be in charge of sending youngsters to school. This is mainly because young children are vulnerable members of society, and they may be confronted with unexpected accidents. In this case, it is imperative for government to assume its unescapable obligation by transporting young students to school. Besides, if government has a sufficient budget, it should provide such welfare services to its taxpayers, as those parents are very likely to be wrapped up in their work, with no more time allocated to giving their children a ride to school. // However, offering totally free transport may seriously strain public finances, forcing the government to make serious cuts to its expenditure in other crucial domains such as healthcare, public infrastructure, poverty elimination, and environment protection.
解析
赞同是政府责任的理由：1. 有义务保护未成年人；2. 有预算的情况下，为其纳税人（家长）提供便利 [这边“有预算”的前提，为下文做铺垫]// 反对理由：校车不是政府必须开销，预算吃紧的情况下应优先考虑其他领域需求，比如：医疗、基础教育、基础设施、脱贫、环境保护等
Ø vulnerable adj. 易受到伤害的
Ø be confronted with 遭遇到
Ø assume vt. 承担
Ø taxpayer n. 纳税人
Ø be wrapped up in把全部精力放在某事上〔以至于没有时间关心别的事〕
Ø strain vt. 使不堪承受
Ø make cuts to sth. 〔规模或数量，尤指政府或公司支出的〕削减，缩减，裁减
Ø elimination n. 消除，根除
Body 2
Acting as the legal guardians of young children, parents undoubtedly ought to take the responsibility to ensure the safety of their kids. In addition, if there is a short distance between the home and the school, it is even more inconvenient for students to take the school bus, as their residences are not always on a school bus route. Driving children to school by parents can instead save much time. // However, it is not always the case, since there are either instances where parents fail to coordinate the time of transporting their children and going to work on time due to the long travelling distance, or instances where impoverished families cannot afford private cars to drive their children to school.
解析
赞同家长接送的理由：1. 作为孩子监护人，理应为孩子安全负责；2. 距离近的情况下，校车的固定线路反而不便利 [这里“距离近”的前提为下文做铺垫] // 反对家长接送理由：特殊情况下，比如家校距离远、低收入家庭没有条件等，家长无法协调时间或金钱接送孩子
Ø guardian n. 监护人
Ø residence n.[C] 住宅
Ø on a …. route 在…的线路上
Ø impoverished adj. 穷困的
04
In conclusion, government and parents should be jointly responsible for transferring children to school. If there is a short distance, then it is advised for parents to take such responsibility. If the travelling distance is rather long, then parents ought to send their children to the nearest school bus station punctually, and it is legitimate for government to charge parents a reasonable fee. Meanwhile, low-income families should be taken into consideration, and government has to guarantee children from these families free access to school buses.
解析
情况摆明自己立场：距离近，家长接送；距离远，家长准时将孩子送到附近校车站（这也是目前现实中常见的解决办法）
Ø jointly adv. 共同地；联合地
Ø punctually adv. 准时地
Ø legitimate adj. 合情合理的
