Ietls essays collection (howtodoielts)

The shortage of housing in big cities can cause severe consequences. Only 
government action can solve this problem. 
To what extent do you agree or disagree? 
Some today argue that only governments are capable of countering problems in 
cities resulting from housing shortages. In my opinion, although governments 
should be the primary actors, individuals can also offer aid. 
On the one hand, only governments have the authority to enact truly large-scale 
change. Governments by design make decisions for the benefit of the entire 
citizenry. An example of how this could relate to housing issues would be the 
urban planning in New York City over the last century. The authorities there had 
to contend with an unprecedented population surge in a limited urban area. They 
responded by building skyscrapers that could house many residents, expanding 
public transport, and constructing various highways to allow commuters to live 
nearby the city. These solutions could only have been successfully undertaken at 
the behest of the government. 
However, though the role of individuals is less prominent, it still exists. In the 
previous example, voters in New York City were able to make their voices heard 
by voting for mayors and governors that best served them. In the event that the 
government is not addressing housing problems sufficiently, then citizens can 
write to their representatives, organize protests, or take more drastic action such 
as relocating to a new city. In the era of social media, it is now more possible than 
ever before for the average person to openly discuss these issues. Individuals will 
always find methods to pressure governments, including in areas related to 
housing. 
In conclusion, I disagree with those who contend only government action can 
improve housing issues in major metropolitan areas as individuals can collectively 
always engender some degree of reform. Governments will ideally enact laws 
based on the needs of the general populace. 

---

4