In one of the previous posts, I mentioned that I'll provide "Before & After Comparisons" of my summaries I wrote during the semester. Since I had some time off from family reunions and the annoying "eat-as-much-as-you-can-it's-Christmas-thing", I decided to work on my texts in order to improve them. I hope I achieved that goal satisfactorily...
One of my summaries I wrote, is about a speech held at the TED conference in Maastricht by a well-educated man named Rutger Bregman (It was published on youtube on 21 October, 2014). He talks about a concept which could reform the welfare system in a positive way and emphasis that it could work properly as well. BUT: I don't want to reveal everything about Bregman's speech. :D
So, here is my second version of my "TED-summary". Like in the previous post ("Before & After Comparison"), the alterations I made are designed in bold. Since I'd like to show you precisely what changes I made, I decided to provide the two versions of my text.
1. This is the first version:
However, the referent
speaker claims the concept of giving
free money to people every month could work. To emphasise its efficiency he
uses an example, in particular he talks about a project within money was given
to homeless who spentd it
with caution. Moreover, he claims argues
that the basic income should be universal and unconditional, like the right
of freedom of speech.
It might be a success in
the reformation of welfare according to the speaker as government would safe
save money. However, there are
rejections regarding this proposal.
Either the concept is
considered as too expensive or “too much
to handle”. The speaker however, disagrees with these points of views and
mentions the good outcome of the project with the homeless. Furthermore he
draws the conclusion that there is a tendency that the concept might come true
as former utopious plans like democracy had been.
2. This is the second version:
“Free money for everyone”, a speech held at the TED conference in Maastricht by Rutger Bregman, deals with the reformation of the welfare system. The speaker introduces a familiar idea formed decades ago, namely the concept of free money for everyone or basic income which has not passed legislation yet.
However, the speaker claims that the concept of giving free money to people every month could
work properly. To emphasise the concepts efficiency he uses an
example, in particular he talks about a project within money was given to
homeless who spent it with caution.
Moreover, he argues that the basic
income should be universal and unconditional, like the right of freedom of
speech.
It might be a success in
the reformation of welfare according to the speaker as government would save money. However, there are
rejections regarding this proposal. Either the concept is considered as too
expensive or “not feasible”. The
speaker however, disagrees with these points of views and mentions the good
outcome of the project with the homeless. Furthermore he draws the conclusion
that there is a tendency that the concept might come true as former utopious
plans did, an example would be the concept
of democracy.
Critique: In the first version of the text, there is to much unnecessary information provided whereas in the second version of the text I tried to condense and keep the main aspects. Other points of criticism were tense agreement and proofreading. Therefore I tried to be aware of mistakes and in addition to that substituted some words which were used incorrectly, in my opinion.
I hope I did an understandable summary for you and if you are interested in watching the speech, here is the link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIL_Y9g7Tg0
See you.
S.
