Topic: Environmental problems should be solved by the government instead of individuals and private companies. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Environmental protection is no doubt a
major issue confronting the modern society with the development of new technologies and the explosion of world population. While the issue is certainly relevant to each individual citizen and all the companies, some people contend that only the government should be concerned about protecting the environment. I concede that the government should lead the efforts in addressing the environmental problems. Nevertheless, cooperation and participation from the corporations and individual citizens are essential as well. There is no doubt that the government is the agency that should play the leading roles in solving the environmental problems. To begin with, with the power to collect taxes from individual citizens and private companies, the government have the financial resources that are necessary to deal with environmental issues. In addition, the government may formulate policies to provide incentives for the companies and individuals to reduce the amount of pollution caused by their activities. Finally, the government is the only institution that may enact laws related to environmental problems. On the other hand, without the cooperation and participation of individual citizens and private companies, the government's efforts to protect the environment would not be effective. For example, the government may launch a campaign to educate the public about the desirability of driving compact cars for reducing the air pollution. The campaign would make little difference if the individuals pay little attention to the information or do not care about the environment at all. Nor would the government's goal be achieved if the car manufacturers do not produce more compact cars for the market. In other words, the government alone cannot solve the problem of environment. It takes the collaborative efforts from individual and corporate citizens to improve the situation. In conclusion, I agree that the government should take the responsibility to lead the society in addressing the problems of environmental pollution as it has the power and resources necessary to do so. Nonetheless, individual citizens and private companies have to be engaged if the government is to accomplish anything.
Topic: Should the media report crimes in details? Nowadays the media often cover news of crimes such as murder, rape and armed robbery in great details. While such information may warn the public of the potential danger and help reduce crimes, providing too much information about crimes might lead to certain negative side effects. In my opinion, the information about crimes should be made accessible to the public but the media should refrain from reporting crimes in an irresponsible manner. To begin with, there is no doubt that people should have the right to information about crimes committed in a community. If someone in the neighbourhood were murdered, the chance of other people being killed would also increase. The people should be notified of the event as well as any actions the authorities had taken immediately. Any attempts to block the news about the crimes would violate people's right to know the truth. Yet, the necessity of informing the public does not mean full details have to be disclosed. Admittedly, the best way to alert the public about a recent crime being committed is through the reporting by the media. Most of us read newspaper and watch TV news everyday. But there are a number of reasons why the media should only report the crimes briefly and let any interested parties follow up with the events by themselves. To begin with, the details of the crimes may cause discomfort and even panic among the members of the public. This is particularly true for the young children in the society. In addition, the time on TV and the space on the newspaper are scarce resources that can be utilized in many different ways. Therefore, the detailed reporting of the crimes would incur high opportunity costs as the public attention would have been directed to other important issues such as education and environment. Finally, the full information about crimes may be made available through the police or other government agencies so that anyone interested in the events may consult the records. Such arrangement would be less costly compared to reporting the details via the media. In conclusion, since crimes are relevant to each and every member of the society, the media should report the events as soon as possible to alert the public and to help prevent more crimes. Nevertheless, the reports of crimes should be relatively brief in order to avoid public panic and to save the precious TV time and newspaper space. Furthermore, anyone who wants to know more about certain events should be allowed to consult the government agencies for such
Topic: When people move to a new country, they should accept the local culture as their own. Do you agree or disagree ? It is common nowadays for people to move to a new country as immigrants to seek new opportunities for work or to get married. For new immigrants, one of the major issues is to what extent they should accept the local culture as their own. While it is important for the newcomers to follow the local rules and convention in order to adapt to the new environment and start their new lives, I believe that it is beneficial to both the immigrants and their host countries if the new members bring in their own culture and lifestyle for the sake of cultural diversity. To begin with, new immigrants would make more smooth transition to their new life if they understand how the society of their host countries works and behave accordingly. To consider a simple example, when an American moves to England, she will have to drive on the left side of the road following the English customs. Otherwise, she will immediately find herself either in a severe accident or in jail for breaking the traffic laws. By the same token, a Mexican woman who immigrates to America will have to try to develop her English proficiency in order to better communicate with the local people whose native language is English. Nonetheless, as I will argue later on, following the local convention in one's daily life is one thing, but accepting the local culture as one's own is quite another. For the American who is now living in England, even though she has to obey all the English laws, she can still choose to retain her American identity and lifestyle. For example, she may cook American food at home and dine with her friends in American-style restaurants. In addition, she can still speak to her children with her American accent and teach her children American values. This is also true for the Mexican woman who moved to America. In fact, it is now generally acknowledged that cultural diversity should be considered a strength for a nation as people from different backgrounds will have a chance to learn from one another. For example, the American immigrant who cook American food at home might also share with her English neighbors the American recipes and help bring the American cuisine to an English dinner table. The Mexican woman who takes English courses in the local community college may also tutor her American classmates who are learning Spanish or studying Mexican culture.
In conclusion, people who choose to immigrate to a different country may face great challenges and opportunities as they adapt to the new environment. It is true that they need to make the efforts to learn the new rules and culture of the host country. But they should also be encouraged to retain their own cultures and lifestyles as new members of a more diverse society.
The life expectancy is longer in many countries. However, there is not enough respect for the elderly people. What are the causes and what are your solutions? Modern medical technologies and health care systems have significantly increased the life expectancy of people around the world. Unfortunately, however, the elderly people, while enjoying longer lives, do not always get the respect they deserve from the society. There are many factors causing this phenomenon. In this essay, I would focus on the lack of communication between the elderly people and other members of the society and propose a few possible solutions to address the issues. The main reason why the elderly are not well respected is that they often fail to communicate with other members in the society effectively. As they retire and leave their job positions, they lose the opportunities to get the most up-to-date information on different aspects of life. They often find it difficult to talk with younger people who are more familiar with the latest development of the society. In addition, the younger people often communicate with one another using the lastest technologies such as mobile phones SMS (short messages services), e-mail and instant messengers. Once the younger people get used to these new gadgets, they lose the patience to talk to the elderly face-to-face. To address the issue of the lack of respect, the elderly people should be provided more opportunities to acquire the latest information about the world and the society. They need to learn how to surf the Internet and use the newest technologies to communicate with other people. The local community colleges may offer courses like "New Tools for Interpersonal Communication" specifically designed for the senior citizens. Moreover, the software designers and the mobile phone manufacturers should take the elderly people's needs into consideration when they work on the design of the interface of the devices to make their products more "elderly-friendly".
Of course, introducing new technologies to the elderly alone cannot solve the problem. It is important to remember the elderly need more than medical services. They also need younger people to accompany them, to hear their stories and to be there for them. Therefore, the younger people should be engaged to pay more attention to the elderly if we want to improve the communication between the elderly and the younger people. Community centers for the elderly should be built to bring the old people and the younger people together in two ways. Firstly, more younger people may be hired to simply spend time with the eldely. Secondly, the community centers may also introduce certain programs to attract volunteers from local high schools and universities. Such programs may help encourage more people to care about the elderly. In conclusion, there are many factors causing the problem of the elderly lacking respect from the younger people. The communication failure between the elderly and the younger people is one of the major issues. To address this problem, efforts should be made to introduce new technologies and to bring more younger people, employees and volunteers, to the elderly. Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoding change. Others, however, think that change is always a good thing. Discuss both these view and give your own opinion. Over the last half century the pace of change in the life of human beings has increased beyond our wildest expectations. This has been driven by technological and scientific breackthroughs that are changing the whole way we view the world on almost daily basis. This means that change is not always a personal option, but an inescapable fact of life, and we need to constantly adapt to keep pace to it. Those people who believe they have achieved some security by doing the same, familiar things are living in denial. Even when people believe they are resisting change themselves, they cannot stop the world around them from changing. Sooner or later they will find that the familiar jobs no longer exist, or that the 'safe' patterns of of behavior are no longer appropriate. However, reaching the conclusion that change is evitable is not the same as assuming that change is always for the better. Unfortunately, it is not always the case that new things are prompted
because they habe good impacts for the majority of people. A lot of innovations are made with the aim of making money for a few. This is because it is the rich and powerful peple in our society who are able to impose changes (such as in working conditions or property developments) that are in their interests. In conclusion, I would say that change can be stinulating and ebergizing for individuals when they pursue it themselves, but that all change, including which is imposed on people, does not necessarily have good outcomes.
In many countries children are engaged in some kind of paid work. Some people regard this as completely wrong, while others consider it as valuable work experience, important for learning and taking responsibility. What are your opinions on this? The issue of children doing paid work is a complex and sensitive one. It is difficult to say who has the right to judge whether children working is 'wrong' or 'valuable'. Opinions will also differ as to 'learning' benefits; no doubt teachers and factory owner, for example, would have varying concerns. An important consideration is the kind of work undertaken. Young children doing arfuous and repetitive tasks ona factory production line, for example, ar eless likely to be 'learning' than older children helping in an old people's home. There are health can safety issues to be considered as well. It is an unfortunate fact that many employers may prefer to use the services of children simply to save money by paying them less than adults and it is this type of exploitation that should be discouraged. However, in many countries children work because their families need the additional income, no matter how small. This was certainly the case in the past in many industrialized countries, and it is very difficult to judge that it is wrong for children today to contribute to the family income in this way. Neverthless, in better economic circumstances, few parents would choose to send their children out to full-time paid work. If learning responisbilities and work experience are cnosidered to be important, then children can acquire these by having light, part-time paid work or
even doing tasks such as helping their parents around the family home, which are unpaid, the undoubtedly of value in children's development.
Research indicates that the characteristics we are born with have much more influence on your personality and development than any experiences we may have in our life. Which do you consdier to be the major influence? Today the way we consider human psychology and mental development is heavily influenced by the genetic sciences. We now understand the importance of inhereited characteristics more than ever before. Yet we are still unable to decide whether an individual's personality and development are more influenced by genetic factors (nature) or by the envrionment (nurture). Research, relating to identical twins, has highlighted how significant inherited characteristics can be for an individual's life. But whether these characteristics are able to develop within the personality of an individual surely depends on whether the circumstances allow such a development. it seems that the experiences we have in life are so unpredictable and so powerful, that they can boost or over-ride other influences, and there seems to be plenty of research findings to confirm this. My own view is that there is no one major influence in a person's life. Instead, the traits, we inherit from our parents and the situations and experiences we have in life are constantly interacting. It is the interacting of the two that shapes a person's personality and dictates how that personality develops. If this were not true, then we would be able to predict the behaviour and character of a person from the moment they were born. In conclusion, I do not think that either nature or nurture is the major influence on a person, but that both have powerful effects. How these factors interact is still unknown today and they remain largely unpredictable in a person's life. Happiness is considered very important in life. Why is it difficult to define? What factors are important in achieving happiness? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Happiness is very difficult to define, because it means so many different things to different people. While some people link happiness to wealth and material success, others think it lies in emotions and loving personal relationships. Yet others think that spiritual paths, rather than either the material world or relationships with people, are the only way to true happiness. Because people interpret happiness for themselves in so many diferent ways, it is difficult to give any definition that is true for everyone. however, if there are different kinds of happiness for different individuals then the first step in achieving it would be to have a degree of self-knowledge. A person needs to know who he or she is before being able to know what it is that makes him or her happy. Of course, factors such as loving relationships, good health, the skills to earn a living and a peaceful environment all contribute to our happiness too. But this does not mean that people without these conditions cannot be happy. Overall, I think an ability to keep clear perspectives in life is a more essential factor in achieving happiness. By that I mean an ability to have a clear sense of what is important in our lives (the welfare of our families, the quality of our relationships, maing other people happy, etc.) and what is not ( a problem at work, getting annoyed about trivial things, etc.). Life self-awareness, this is also very difficult to achieve, but I think these ar ethe two factors that may be most important for achieving happiness. As most people spend a major part of their adult life at work, job satisfaction is an important element of individual wellbeing. what factors contribute to job satisfaction? How realistic is the expectation of job satisfaction for all workers? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Nowadays many adults have full-time jobs and the proportion of their lives spent doing such jobs is very high. So feelings about one's job must reflect how an individual feels about his or her life as a whole, and because of this, job satisfaction is indeed very important for the wellbeing of that person. Employees get job satisfaction in a number of ways. Firstly, a person
needs to feel that they are doing valued and valuable work, so positive feedback from superior is very important in his respect. A sense of fulfillment is also encouraged if a worker feels the job is worth doing because it contributes to the society or the economy as a whole. Secondly, when someone feels they are improving or developing their skills through training opportunities, for example, then there is a sense of progress and purpose that rewards a worker. The sense of belonging to a team or a working community also contributes to job satisfaction because colleagues help each other to enjoy their working lives. Satisfaction is also increased by a sense of responsibility for the loyal to a team. Of course not everyone enjoys their work. Hard economic realities mean that many people have little choice in the kind of job they can get. In some cases an employees is working in a job that suits neither their skills nor their personality. Some jobs are repetitive and boring, and labor relations may be poor and lead to resentment and insecurity rather than to job satisfaction. However, even though it is unlikely that all workers do feel happy in their work, I think it is not unrealistic to promote more job satisfaction in any job. If the factors identified above implemented, then any job can be improved and more workers can feel greater degrees of job satisfaction. Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is unfair. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. As a result of contant media attention, sports professionals in my country have become stars and celebrities, and those at the top are paid huge salaries. Just like movie stars, they live extravagant lifestyles with huge houses and cars. Many people find their rewards unfair, especially when comparing these super salaries with those of top surgeons or research scientists, or even leading politcians who have the responsibility of governing the country. However, sports salaries are not determined by considering the contribution to society a person makes, or the level of responsibility he or she holds. Instead, they reflect the public popularity of sport in general and the level of public support that successful stars can generate. So the notion of "fairness" is not the issue.
Those who feel that sports stars are justified might argue that the number of professionals with real talent are very few, and the money is a recognition of the skills and dedication a person needs to be successful. Competition is constant and a player is tested every time they perform in their relatively short career. The pressure from the the media is intense and there is little privacy out the the spotlight. So all of these factors may justify the huge earnings. Personally, I think that the amount of money such sports stars is more justified than the huge earnings of movie stars, but at the same time, it indicates that our society places more value on sport than on more essential professional and achievements.
In some countries young people ar encouraged to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university studies. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decide to do this. It is quite common these days for young people in many countries to have a break from studying after graduating from high school. The trend is not restricted to rich students who have the money to travel, but is also evident among poorer students who choose to work and become economically independent for a period of time. The reaons for this trend may involve the recognition that a young adult who passes directly from school to university is rather restricted in terms of general knowledge and experience of the world. By contrast, those who have spent some time earning a living or travelling to other places, have a broader view of life and better personal resources to draw on. They tend to be more indpendent, which is very important factor in academic study and research, as well as giving them an advantage in terms of coping with the chanllenges of student life. However, there are certainly dangers in taking time off at the important age. Young adults may end up never returning to their studies or finding it difficult to readapt to an academic environment. They may think that it is better to continue in a particular job, or to do something completely different from a university course. But overall, I think this is less likely today, when academic qualifications are essential for getting a reasonable career.
My view is that young people should be encouraged to broaden their horizons. That is the best way for them to get a clear perspective of what they are hoping to do with their lives and why. Students with such a perspective are usually the most effective and motivated ones and taking a year off may be the best way to gain this. It's generally believed that some people are born with certain talents, for instance for sport or music, are others are not. However, it is sometimes claimed that any child can be taught to become a good sports person or musician. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. The relative importance of natural talent and training is a frequent topic of discussion when people try to explain different levels of ability in, for example, sport, art or music. Obviously, education systems are based on the belief that all children can effectively be taught to acquire different skills, including those associated with sport, art or music. So from our own school experience, we can find plenty of evidence to support the view that a child can acquire these skills with continuted teaching and guided practice. Howver, some people believe that innate talent is what differentiates a person who has been trained to play a sport or an intrusment, from those who become good players. In other words, there is more to the skill than to a learned technique, and this extra talent cannot be taught, no matter how good the teacher or how frequent a child practices. I personally think that some people do have talents that are probably inherited via their genes. Such talents can give individuals a facility for certain skills that allow them to excel, while more hard-wokring students never manage to reach a comparable level. But, as with all questions of nature versus nurture, they are not mutually exclusive. Good musicians or artists and exceptional sports star have probably succeeded because of both good training and natural talent. With the natural talent, continuous training would be neither attractive nor productive, and without the training, the child would not learn hotw to exploit and develop their talent. In conclusion, I agree that any child can be taught particular skills, but to be really good in areas such as music, art or sport, then some
natural talent is required. The subjects and lesson contents are decided by the authorities such as the government. Some people argue that teachers should make the choice. To what extent do you agree or disagree? It has long been argued amid the community: Which one counts more, authority or academy? Notwithstanding the fact that our current pedagogy is so much clinging to the central committee, the educational system is in a blockbuster amount of outcry for reform. Does the temporary system still embrace rationality? Or is it the ripe juncture to refurnish it out and out? I personally took a deep look in it. In the showdown between authority and academy, the former arguably outweighs the latter. Politics is a compulsory course in all kinds of enrollment examinations as well as all levels of educational institutions. The government, or a commander-in-chief to be vivid, needs to be held accountable for the stability of society. Education is by all means an almighty tool to incubate a behaving generation. With social development gaining momentum, a farsighted power base generally with a broader scope than the individuals, needs to build up particular majors specializing in fledgling domains involving cleaning energy, high-tech innovation, interpretation, to name but a few. Trained personnel in such fields are usually more fit into the society. Arguments being articulated above though, academy-oriented teaching methodology is so far stillreputed for its own merits. With teachers gaining more says in selecting knowledge, the students will presumably be inculcated with a more objective perception of the curriculum. Without authority barging in, the possibility of the impartiality being jeopardized is excluded for the mission of serving the regime is no longer valid. Only under such circumstance can the intrinsic value of the subject be authentically and manifested to the thirsty learners in an untangled manner. An untarnished and pristine academic ambience is colossally demanding by numerous pundits for the sake of equity and truth. To sum up, there's no such inception that is appropriate to be dubbed "sheerly right" or "starkly wrong" . The righteous one solely lies in the rationality of adapting it. Authority, in China's case, can never be an outlier standing by the side of academic circle owing to its unique national condition