If you could be famous, but be poor forever, would you do it?

If you could be famous, but be poor forever, would you do it?

My answer is cleardefinitely no.

I think that "definitely" makes more sense in this context; saying that your answer is "clearly no" implies that the reader should already have enough info from what you've said to infer what your feelings on this matter are.

I think we can't be both famous and happy at the same time.

To beBeing famous means that if you go out, people would recognize you and bother you.

With social medias, it is worth, ise. If you fell on the street, someone would film you and upload it onto the Internet.

To make a long story short, I think that to bebeing famous isounds like hell.

If you could be famous, but also poor forever, would you do it?

If you could be famous, but also poor forever, would you do it?

My answer is clearemphatically no.

"Clearly" doesn't make sense here since we don't know your reasoning. "Emphatically" makes more sense to me, but I'm not sure if that's what you meant.

I think we can't be both famous and happy.

Or "famous and happy at the same time," since you're emphasizing that these are contradictory.

To beBeing famous means that if you go out people would recognize you and bother you.

When to use the gerund and when to use the infinitive can be confusing, but here the gerund seems more appropriate.

With social medias it is worth,se: if you feall on the street someone wouldill film you and loadput it on the Internet.

The present-future combination sounds more natural here than the imperfect-conditional combination. The connotations are slightly different.

If you could be famous, but would be poor forever, would you do it?

If you could be famous, but would be poor forever, would you do it?

I think weyou can't be famous and happy.

To be famous means that if you go out, people would recognize you and bother you.

With social medias, it is worth, ise. If you fell on the street, someone would film you and loadput it on the Internet.