+0
Please edit/correct the given text:

It is not only with western cultures. These taboos also exist here. Western cultures are representations of inherent human nature. Many persons from my town who are settled in countries like/such as USA, Canada, and UK etc. say that Asian children are more obedient to their elders. Perhaps they are. The question is why they are more obedient. The simple answer would be they are financially dependent on their families in many ways. In many Asian countries you don't earn any kind of money until you are finished with university studies. If you are at bad terms with your parents, then there are less chances that someone will give his daughter's hand in marriage. If Asian children have all the facilities, then they will be no different from western youth. Why has communism failed? Because human nature doesn't like it. Humans like to possess wealth and excercise control over others. Today even a common person has more facilities than a king of yesteryears but still he don't find himself happy. Many factors of your life are controlled by the society.
+0
Some suggestions/comments...

It is not only with Western cultures. [This seems weak, and is not a good opening sentence IMO] These taboos also exist here. [What taboos? Has this been explained earlier?] Western cultures are representations [perhaps "manifestations" might be better?] of inherent [as opposed to what other sort?] human nature. Many people from my town who are settled in countries such as the USA, Canada, and the UK, etc. [not necessary with "such as"] say that Asian children are more obedient to their elders than Western children. Perhaps they are. The question is why they are more obedient. The simple answer would be [I'd prefer "is" here, unless you really don't want to be that definite] that they are financially dependent on their families in many ways [doesn't seem to add any value]. In many Asian countries [I'm a little confused now about whether you're discussing Asian children living in Asian countries, or Western countries, or both. Earlier, in the "settled in countries such as..." sentence, I had it in my mind that the subject was Asian children in Western countries, but now it seems not.] you ["you" seems too informal here, throughout] don't earn any kind of money until you are finished with university studies. [what about all those people who don't go to university?] If you are on bad terms with your parents, then there is less chance that someone will give his daughter's hand in marriage. [you're assuming "you" is male?] If Asian children have all the facilities, ["all the facilities" does not read too well to me ... do you mean the same standard of living and same opportunities as Western children?] then they will be no different from Western youth. [This should read either "When Asian children have ... they are ...", or "If Asian children had ... then they would be ...", depending on which slant you want to give it, and which society(ies) you are talking about] Why has communism failed? Because human nature doesn't like it. Humans like to possess wealth and exercise control over others. Today even an ordinary person has a better standard of living than a king of yesteryear but still he don't he may not find himself happy. Many factors of your life are controlled by the society. [Argument seems to be wandering... I'm not sure how coherently this whole passage hangs together.]
Comments  
Here are some suggestions for yout text:

It is not only with western cultures. These taboos also exist here.
Western cultures are representations of inherent human nature. [better: Western cultures embody the characteristics inherent in human nature.]

Many people persons from my town who are settled in countries like/such as the USA, Canada, and UK etc. say that Asian children are more obedient to their elders. Perhaps they are. The question is why they are more obedient. The simple answer would be that they are financially dependent on their families in many ways. [or: they are dependent on their families in many ways.] In many Asian countries people you don't earn any kind of appreciable amounts of money until they you are finished with their university studies. If a young Asian man is you are on bad terms with your his parents, then there are fewer less chances that someone will give his daughter's hand to him in marriage. If Asian children had complete independence all the facilities, then they would will be no different from western youth. Why has communism failed? Because is is incompatible with human nature. doesn't like it. Humans like to possess wealth and excercise control over others. Today even a common (average?) person has more possessions facilities than a king of antiquity yesteryears but still he doesn't find himself happy. Many factors of a person's your life are controlled by the society.

[/quote]
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
 Mr Wordy's reply was promoted to an answer.
AlpheccaStarsHere are some suggestions for yout text:

It is not only with western cultures. These taboos also exist here.
Western cultures are representations of inherent human nature. [better: Western cultures embody the characteristics inherent in human nature.]

Many people persons from my town who are settled in countries like/such as the USA, Canada, and UK etc. say that Asian children are more obedient to their elders. Perhaps they are. The question is why they are more obedient. The simple answer would be that they are financially dependent on their families in many ways. [or: they are dependent on their families in many ways.] In many Asian countries people you don't earn any kind of appreciable amounts of money until they you are finished with their university studies. If a young Asian man is you are on bad terms with your his parents, then there are fewer less chances that someone will give his daughter's hand to him in marriage. If Asian children had complete independence all the facilities, then they would will be no different from western youth. Why has communism failed? Because is is incompatible with human nature. doesn't like it. Humans like to possess wealth and excercise control over others. Today even a common  (average?)  person has more possessions facilities than a king of antiquity yesteryears but still he doesn't find himself happy. Many factors of a person's  your life are controlled by the society.

Thank you very much for the editing and corrections.

Why shouldn't it be who are settled?

I shouldn't use ''less' because it is used to compare two things. Right? But what if we suppose that we are comparing two young Asians when one is obedient and other is not. The one who is obedient to his parents will have more chances of getting married.
"Are settled" is OK, but the active voice "settled" is stronger. It emphasizes that they moved there and found homes and jobs, and established new lives. It also refers to people who came earlier throughout history, not just the people who live there now.

I say "I am settled down in bed." to mean that I am resting comfortably and quietly.

"less" is correct for non-count nouns. "I drink less water than I should"
"fewer" is used for count nouns - I have fewer chances to win the lottery because I bought fewer tickets.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Mr WordySome suggestions/comments...

It is not only with Western cultures. [This seems weak, and is not a good opening sentence IMO] These taboos also exist here. [What taboos? Has this been explained earlier?] Western cultures are representations [perhaps "manifestations" might be better?] of inherent [as opposed to what other sort?] human nature. Many people from my town who are settled in countries such as the USA, Canada, and the UK, etc. [not necessary with "such as"] say that Asian children are more obedient to their elders than Western children. Perhaps they are. The question is why they are more obedient. The simple answer would be [I'd prefer "is" here, unless you really don't want to be that definite] that they are financially dependent on their families in many ways [doesn't seem to add any value]. In many Asian countries [I'm a little confused now about whether you're discussing Asian children living in Asian countries, or Western countries, or both. Earlier, in the "settled in countries such as..." sentence, I had it in my mind that the subject was Asian children in Western countries, but now it seems not.] you ["you" seems too informal here, throughout] don't earn any kind of money until you are finished with university studies. [what about all those people who don't go to university?] If you are on bad terms with your parents, then there is less chance that someone will give his daughter's hand in marriage. [you're assuming "you" is male?]  If Asian children have all the facilities, ["all the facilities" does not read too well to me ... do you mean the same standard of living and same opportunities as Western children?] then they will be no different from Western youth. [This should read either "When Asian children have ... they are ...", or "If Asian children had ... then they would be ...", depending on which slant you want to give it, and which society(ies) you are talking about] Why has communism failed? Because human nature doesn't like it. Humans like to possess wealth and exercise control over others. Today even an ordinary person has a better standard of living than a king of yesteryear but still he don't he may not find himself happy. Many factors of your life are controlled by the society. [Argument seems to be wandering... I'm not sure how coherently this whole passage hangs together.]

Mr Wordyas opposed to what other sort?
As opposed to the one which is not a genuine human nature which supersedes the inherent one because of social stigmas and prevalent social customs. As we all want to be independent, every woman wants to get married to the man she loves, every child has a dream to pursue the career he has always dreamt of, every girl wants to go and see the world and not dictated by her society what to do and what no to do. Are you getting what I'm trying to say?
Mr Wordythroughout
What does throughout mean in the above context?
Mr Wordyyou're assuming "you" is male?
Of course.  Were you thinking about other kind of marriages?
Mr Wordy
depending on which slant you want to give it
Do you mean by slant you want to give it that if I want to more definite then I will say "When Asian children have ... they are ...", and when less definite then "If Asian children had ... then they would be''?
Mr WordyI'm not sure how coherently this whole passage hangs together
I would have written ''I'm not sure how coherently this whole passage connects together. Would that have been correct?
Jackson6612As opposed to the one which is not a genuine human nature which supersedes the inherent one because of social stigmas and prevalent social customs.

Human behaviour can be and is dictated by social customs, but, to me, human nature is always the "inherent" sort -- that's what the word "nature" means.
Jackson6612What does throughout mean in the above context?
It means that I found the word "you" too informal (in this context) everywhere you used it. I said "throughout" just to avoid repeating the same comment.
Jackson6612Of course. Were you thinking about other kind of marriages?
No, the issue here is that you're using the word "you" in the sense of "people in general" (at least, I assume you are), which is understood to include people of both sexes. It seems a little odd to restrict it to males in one particular statement.
Jackson6612Do you mean by slant you want to give it that if I want to more definite then I will say "When Asian children have ... they are ...", and when less definite then "If Asian children had ... then they would be''?
Yes, pretty much. If you're considering (or including) Asian children who live in Western societies, and your thesis is that these children do, when assimilated, have the same "facilities" as Western children, then the "when" version is appropriate. If you're considering only Asian children in circumstances where they clearly don't have such facilities then it becomes a hypothetical and "if" is more appropriate.
Jackson6612I would have written ''I'm not sure how coherently this whole passage connects together. Would that have been correct?
Yes, that seems OK. "Hangs together" is more informal.