下面是出国留学网托福栏目为大家带来的“政府投资类托福写作话题解析”，希望对大家有所帮助!
托福独立写作之政府投资类话题
涉及政府决策的题目，我们就要考虑政府做一件事情的目的是什么，不光是为这件事情本身，肯定有一些隐含因素，比如为了促进经济、国家形象、人民生活、保护文化等等。切换不同的领域去考虑问题就能很顺利地去写出分论点来了。
托福独立写作之政府投资类真题
1、During times of economic crisis, which area of spending do you think the government should reduce: education, healthcare or support for the unemployed?
这道题是一道3选1的题目，该类题型必须在文章主体部分对所给的3个选项进行有效对比，明确说明问什么所选选项比剩余两个选项更加合理。
毫无疑问，在正常情况下，教育、医疗和对失业人员的补助都是政府的基本职能。但是这道题目给出了特殊条件——在经济危机的情况下，即政府本身财政资金已经不足，因此，我们应该在3个选项中选择相对不重要的一个选项。我们一起来分析一下这三个领域的重要性：投资教育，为的是提高公民的文化素质，增长知识;投资医疗，为的是治病救人，确保人民有病能就医;投资失业人员补助，为的是确保公民都有工作，能够吃饱穿暖，保障基本生活水平，避免失业率过高带来犯罪，破坏社会稳定。
这样一分析，我们便能够看出这3个领域的重要性之分。我们可以选择：政府应该减少对教育的投入，因为减少对医疗的投入会危机生命，减少对失业人员的补助会危机社会稳定，而相对而言，减少教育投入只会减少公民接收知识的途径和机会，危害相对较小，并且个人和组织也可以支持教育，不一定非得政府来进行。
2、Do you agree or disagree with the follow statement? Society benefits more from works of great artists than from political leaders.
这道题乍眼一看难度较高，很多同学会想不出理由。拿到题目我们应该问问自己谁是artists?谁是political leaders? 很明显，artists包括painters、musicians、writers，而political leaders可以理解为president或chairman。
在这道题目里，我们应该想到political leaders其实就是政府意志的执行者，维护政府对国家的管理，所以我们可以把political leaders转换成government：到底是艺术重要还是政府重要?我们可以给出观点：政府，也就是political leaders更加重要。为什么呢?因为Political leaders ensure social stability and maintain social order. They have the legal power to formulate and enforce laws and regulations. The policies they made have great impact on various aspects of the society, including art, education, environment, employment, economy, medical care, and social security.
此外，我们也可以说political leaders代表了一个国家的形象，通过国事访问和协约签订使得别的国家了解本国，并且决定了本国的发展，因此比艺术家更重要。
托福独立写作之政府投资类范文
政府和企业应该分享科技发明创造
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Governments and corporations should share all of their scientific discoveries with the rest of the world.
托福独立写作范文：
Sample Answer:
The majority of government and corporate research first enters the world in the form of commercial goods protected under intellectual property law. However, some believe that the results of their research should be freely shared for the good of humanity, rather than sold commercially. While I understand this well-intentioned sentiment, I have to disagree. I believe that such an idealistic system would actually be detrimental to scientific research overall.
First of all, research requires money. Equipment, staff, and facilities can quickly get expensive if you want to make any sort of reasonable progress. That is one reason why the majority of research conducted by governments and corporations (as opposed to say, non-profit organizations) is commercially driven. Take pharmaceutical research, for example: Every year, pharmaceutical companies pour billions of dollars a year into developing chemicals with medical applications. Of the countless chemicals they might investigate, only a select few turn out to be viable and make it to market. These companies have to sell their products at a price that allows them to recoup their massive research investment.
Secondly, the unfortunate reality is, the majority of people operate on greed principles. This is why capitalism works--it puts greedy people in competition with other greedy people, and as a byproduct the consumer benefits. This is not to say that all cases of research are self-serving, but if you take away the reward--that is, monetary incentive to do research--then progress in a lot of really valuable research would grind to a halt. That is why most countries have some form of intellectual property law: By protecting the creator's (or in this case, the researching organization's) right to commercially benefit from their work, governments incentivize the kind of research that society needs in order to progress. And usually, the fruits of such labor are eventually spread freely anyway: In the United States for example, work becomes public domain after a specified period of time.
Finally, as a matter of safety, certain types of research are better off not being freely distributed, at least at first. Nuclear energy research is an obvious example. Such research should be safeguarded by the countries that first develop it, in order to fully test its consequences before releasing it to the rest of the world. This is because other groups or countries may not have the expertise, resources, or ethical sensibility to apply it safely and responsibly. The same applies to any research into military technology. Can you imagine what would happen if you made such potentially destructive research available to people unable to comprehend its dangers? This would be akin to giving a child a knife.
I can understand why many wish that governments and corporations would release their research for free. However, for the reasons outlined above, such a system would just not be viable given the current realities we face. (Richard, 477 words)
托福作文栏目推荐：