Essay Model Answers
>>Many young people regularly change their jobs over the years. What are the reasons for this? Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
Everybody has to work to sustain his or her livelihood. Some people spend their whole life while working a single job, but several youngsters keep changing their employment. The main reason behind this trend is job satisfaction issues among the young. I think this trend has more lacunae than its benefits because it is detrimental to the progress of both employees and employers. However, youngsters can attain many experiences if they do different type of works.
The lower job satisfaction is the primary cause that leads youngsters to change work frequently. Factors such as salary, timing, privileges, perks, work environment, leaves and distance of the workplace from home determine people’s satisfaction towards their job. If some of all factors do not conform to their expectations, they resign from their work. Also, some people are much enthusiastic about learning new things. When they feel that they have learned everything from their current job, people move to another work.
However, it causes disadvantages to both youngsters and their employers. People cannot gain full experience while working a job only for some years. In-depth knowledge of work can only be gained by doing it for a decade or more. For instance, a police officer can only gain knowledge of investigation if he indulges himself in this work for several years. After working for a long time, they gain knowledge of solving cases rapidly. Similarly, it also causes issues for employers. Every employer has to train a new worker for some months by investing time and money on him, and while working for some years, workers become skilled in their work. If an experienced employee resigns after some years without returning the value of their training, it causes loss to the organisation. Thus, the propensity of youngsters changing several jobs is disadvantageous for them and their employers.
But it makes them less susceptible to unemployment. Youngsters can attain many experiences and knowledge while working in many companies and doing a different type of works. Every new job gives a new experience and knowledge to the workers. They learn new things, meet new people and face new challenges, which make them resilient of doing several works; such type of people are less vulnerable to unemployment as they have several work experiences and knowledge and they can do many types of jobs.
In conclusion, less job satisfaction is the main reason for youngsters leaving jobs more than often. But it is not favourable for the development of the young and their employers because youngsters cannot gain the full knowledge of work in one or two years; employers also have to spend money to train new workers if an experienced employee leaves their job. But the young can gain several experiences while working in many jobs, which reduce their chances of remaining unemployed. Therefore, its disadvantages overshadow the benefits.
To avail essay checking service, click here.
>>Some people believe that governments should not provide international aid when they have unemployment and homelessness in their country. Do you agree or disagree?
No country around the world is self-reliant. It is said that if a country has unemployment and poverty, it should not help other countries. I completely disagree with this viewpoint because aiding other nations can help the government to redress problems that are prevailed in their own country.
Giving monetary help to a country that is in distress can in-turn reduce the problem of unemployment in one’s own country. Every government has a limited capacity to create jobs every year. If they spend the whole revenue on generating employments, it can compromise other developments. But when the state provides money to other nations, it develops a good relationship between countries. Such harmonious relations culminate in signing trade agreements, memorandum of understandings, and opening bilateral business opportunities. By working together, all governments can eliminate their country-specific issues. For instance, in 2011, Japan was ravaged by tsunamis and lost the property of billions of dollars. Despite have millions of unemployed youth in the country, the Indian government gave ten million dollars to Japan. Because of this humanitarian assistance, in the year 2018, Japan started the project of bullet trains in India and created thousands of jobs. Thus, giving aid to other countries is beneficial for donner countries.
Similarly, it can also assist a country to come out of poverty if it helps other nations. All countries have a finite number of resources. Some countries do not have many resources that could generate enough goods and services to sustain their economy; people of such countries have to work hard, but they receive less income. In this situation, a cordial relationship with the governments of other countries can help a state to send its people to these countries for work. From where, people can earn more money and send remittance. Consequently, help to alleviate poverty in the home country.
To conclude, every country lacks in one or another way. By helping other countries, a state can redress their problems, which cannot be reduced by themselves. Therefore, I disagree with the viewpoint and believe that the state should help other nations.
>>Some people think it is better to impose a tax on companies which produce pollution while others think that there are other solutions. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Pollution has become the cause of concern for everyone. It is said that imposing taxes on highly polluting factories is pertinent. But some people believe that several other measures can be taken to diminish pollution. However, the problem of pollution is soo severe that, as per my opinion, all possible strategies should be adopted to contain it.
Industries and factories are considered as the biggest air polluters. All production units use tonnes of coal and gallons of petrol and diesel for running their machinery; these fossil fuels emanate several noxious gases which are injurious for the health of human and the environment. The more fossil fuel is used, the more will be the concentration of harmful gases in the environment. A report, for instance, revealed in the United Nation Conference on Climate Change showed that since the industrial revolution in 1850, the temperature on the earth is increased by 2-degree Celsius because of green house gases. Therefore, inflicting higher taxes or cesses on industries will increase the government’s revenue that can be used to diminish the pollution.
In addition to the above measure, other strategies should also be adopted to alleviate pollution. As cars and other motor vehicles are the second most polluter of the environment, its use requires to be discouraged. The state should increase the public transportation system so that people do not use their vehicles. Also, water pollution can be decreased if the sewage water is treated before releasing it on the land or other water resources: river, lakes, and ponds. Additionally, plastic is not only degrading the soil quality it also pollutes oceans and seas. The public should abandon its use, and the government should ban plastic production.
To conclude, although imposing taxes on factories that causes pollution can increase the state’s income which can be used to control pollution, taking other measures are necessary to fight with this problem effectively. In addition to penalizing pollution-causing companies, the state should ban plastic, provide the public transport facilities, and treat the sewage before releasing in the open. Therefore, every type of measure needs to be taken to clean the environment.
>>Some people say that now we can see films on our phones or tablets there is no need to go to the cinema. Others say that to be fully enjoyed, films need to be seen in a cinema, Discuss both views and given your own opinion.
Movies and motion pictures are a great source of entertainment. Many people think they do not require to go to theatres to watch films as they can see it on their mobile devices. But others believe that cinemas are only the place where movies can be enjoyed the most. Although the revolution in electronic devices has facilitated people to watch movies in phones, in my opinion, films can only be enjoyed in theatres because these are made only for this purpose.
Advances in electronic gadgets and communication technologies have made it easier to watch movies from home. About a decade ago, mobiles’ storage space had been less, screens were small, and the internet could barely download a movie within twenty-four hours. But now, mobile phones come with hundreds of gigabytes of storage capacity that can store thousands of movies. Besides, its high-resolution screens allow viewers to see a clear picture. High-speed internet facilitates people to watch any movie online. The fourth-generation (4G) internet enable people to download any movie within minutes or watch it through live streaming. Moreover, services such as Netflix and amazon prime allow people to see any newly released movie with a meagre monthly subscription fee. All these facilities make people think that visiting cinemas is futile when they have mobile phones.
However, the infrastructure and technology of cinemas are unmatchable and made only entertain people. Theatres are equipped with wider screens that can be a thousand times bigger than mobile phones, which do not cause strain to the eyes of audiences and show everything clearly with high-definition quality. Mobiles phones can never emulate the sound clarity of theatres. Cinemas have three-dimensional sounds that mimic real-life auditory experiences. Also, the ambience of cinemas is created in a way that fully indulges audiences in the movie. Unlike mobile phones, there is no disruption if someone calls on the mobile; people can switch off the phone while watching movies in a theatre, which is not possible if they see a movie on the mobile. Moreover, now, many cinemas provide virtual reality and three-dimensional picture facility that make movies interactive; people start feeling like that they are a part of the film. However, there is no such facility in mobile devices.
In conclusion, electronic gadgets such as mobiles, tablets and phablets have developed to the extent that people can watch any movie by sitting at their homes. But it cannot make movies as enjoyable as theatres because cinemas are equipped with more advanced screens and sound technologies that grab the whole attention of people and indulge them in the film. Therefore, to enjoy a movie the most, people should go to cinemas.
>>Some people say that parents should encourage their children to take part in organised group activities in their free time. Others say that it is important for children to learn how to occupy themselves on their own. Discuss these views and give your own opinion.
Children need to spend their time productively. Many parents believe that their children should participate in activities which are organised in groups while many others give importance to the ability of children to keep themselves occupied when they are not with friends. In my opinion, children need to socialise with their peers as well as learn to be productive when they are alone.
Children must be a part of the activities that are organised with their friends. They attain numerous skills such as teamwork, leadership roles, social and communication skills. In other words, they learn how to interact with other people which is a skill crucial for achieving success in life. By participating in group activities, children can make friends who have similar interests, which ultimately leads to happiness in the future. Children also get a chance to meet people from different cultural backgrounds that can help them to learn about several places and cultures. Humans are social beings and hence interacting with other children is vital for their mental well being.
However, children also need to spend some time alone to develop certain qualities which are difficult to achieve when being occupied with others. They should have time to reflect on themselves and identify their interests when alone and bored. They also need to focus on academics so that they get good scores in exams which are required to achieve their dreams and aspirations. Children can also spend time developing in their leisure like painting, poetry, reading, writing stories, learn a new craft and many more. It is particularly useful when they want to relax and have a break from stressful schoolwork or job demands in the future when they grow up.
I believe that parents should give equal importance to their children to participate in group activities as well as encourage them to be productive when they are alone. For instance, there should be activities like sports, dance, scouting and theatres, which can help children not only in attaining the skill but also learn social and communication skills. In addition to this, children need to spend some quality time alone to discover themselves and be productive. Being alone helps children to be creative as boredom leads to creativity. If they learn to enjoy on their own, children will remain occupied, which keep them away from depression due to loneliness.
To conclude, parents must encourage and guide their children to be active in group activities as well as learn to enjoy time alone by doing productive work. By doing so, children will get a chance to develop themselves, and they get equipped to face challenges life throws on them.
>>In some areas of the US, a ‘curfew’ is imposed, in which teenagers are not allowed to be out of doors after a particular time at night unless they are accompanied by an adult. What is your opinion about this?
Curfew is a preventive measure uses by the state to maintain law and order. Teenagers are barred from going outside of their homes alone late at night in some regions of the United States. In my opinion, it is a right action by the government as it provides safety and security to teenagers and makes their future free of crime.
Curfew can protect teenagers from indulging in crime. In the United States, many places are a hotspot of criminal activities, where criminals, drug peddlers and habitual offenders become more active at night. They usually lure the youngsters for helping them in committing a crime, who agree easily to do anything for money. Criminals can transport drugs, kill someone, and extort money from others with the assistance of naive young people. Even if teenagers do not take part in any unlawful, coming in contact with criminals can implicate them in lawsuits. However, accompanying parents or siblings can stop youngsters from dealing with criminals. Thus, this measure prevents teenagers from becoming criminals.
Curfews also save young people from becoming a victim of crime. Robbery, chain snatching, extortion, murders and rape are common at night. Teenagers are not smart enough to escape from such situations. So they can be a soft target for criminals. But being with elders, teenagers are safe as criminals cannot harm them in the presence of adults. Adults can defend youngsters in case of any attack. The United States Department of Homeland Security, for instance, published a result report on the implications of late-night curfews in Florida. The report asserted a sixty-five per cent reduction in unlawful activities against teenagers. Therefore, curfews can potentially save teenagers from the danger of crime.
In conclusion, measures such as restricting the movement of teenagers in late-night resorts by the state to provide safety and security to them. Late-night curfews for teenagers not only save them from becoming the victim of crime but also stop them from becoming criminals. Thereby, curfews in the United States are for the protection and safety of the young generation.
>>In recent years, many small local shops have closed because customers travel to large shopping malls to do their shopping. Is this a positive or negative development?
Shops in local and residential areas have many direct and indirect benefits. But due to the opening of supermarkets, elite and middle-class people started buying goods from there, which causes the closing of local shops. I consider it a negative development because it aggravates the unemployment problem and endangers the livelihood of poorer people.
The permanent closure of local shops increases the rate of unemployment. When people do not buy commodities from their nearby shops, shopkeepers earn no money. The perpetuation of this situation leads shop owners to close their businesses. It makes both shopkeepers and less educated youths, who work at such shops, unemployed. Owners of local shops do not have technical skills or higher education which is necessary to get a good job. Lack of experience, apart from selling products, reduces their chances of getting a job in a company. As a result, the proprietor and workers of such shops remain unemployed.
Apart from that, poorer people’s lives can be threatened because of the closing of local shops. Most poor people buy groceries and other daily need things from shops near their homes because the owner of such shops know their customers and allows them to take goods without payment. Poor customers pay for commodities when they have money, not whenever they buy something. This mutual understanding between the both leads to sustain poor people’s lives. However, if all local shops close, everyone has to go to supermarkets where no one allows take anything without money. Poor people cannot borrow anything from the big store by committing to pay later. Also, in many supermarkets, below a fixed amount, shopping is not allowed. In XYZ supermarket, for instance, the minimum shopping value must be more than rupees 1000. Shopping below this amount is not permitted, which is not affordable by the poor. In the absence of food and daily need goods, their lives can be endangered. Thus, local shops are a lifeline for poor people.
In conclusion, local shops are beneficial for people and the country. It employs both less educated and uneducated people. The closing of small shops increase unemployment and make it difficult for poor people to borrow daily essentials. Therefore, middle class and upper-class people’s interest in buying goods from supermarkets and the closure of local shops is a negative development.
In many countries, people decide to leave their parent’s homes once they finish school. They start living on their own or sharing a home with friends. Is this a negative or positive development?
From ages, children live with their parents for their whole life. But in recent times, when they complete their secondary schooling, they decide to live in a separate house without their parents. They prefer to live alone or with their friends. I believe it is a positive development because living without parents makes them self-dependent and increase their learning capabilities.
Living alone makes young people independent. At home, parents look after children’s needs and do their work: mothers prepare food, wash their clothes, and fathers earn money for them. Even for small tasks, the youth rely on their guardians. When they live alone, they do all work by themselves. They realize the responsibility of self-care, complete all household chores, and start doing work to earn money to sustain their lives. While living with their parents, they are hardly aware of such duties. Living separately, therefore, from their parents help youngsters to become self-reliant.
Sharing home with friends can enhance peoples’ knowledge. Young people learn skills, moral and ethical values, and other life principles from their parents by living with them. They adopt their parents’ habits, characteristics, and language. Staying with parents for a lifetime, somewhere confines the mind of the young. It limits their learning efficiency. Sharing a room, in contrast, and home with people from different places, allow them to learn new views, language and skill. A person, for instance, who is an Indian when lives with a British can refine his English, and know about British culture. This learning can help him to improve his personality. It is hard to learn such things if people do not leave their homes. Thus, it is beneficial to live far from parents for youth.
In conclusion, youngsters leave their ancestral home once they pass their secondary education. They do all their woks and become independent. Living with others helps them to learn several new things. Therefore, leaving parents’ house is beneficial for the youngsters.
Most people accept that we now live in a globalised world, but not everyone agrees that this is beneficial. Is globalisation positive or negative development?
Communication and transportation technologies are a precursor to globalisation. Although a high proportion of people concede that they live in a global village, it is not accepted by all that globalisation is advantageous. But I think globalisation is a positive development because it has reduced unemployment in many countries and improved cooperation among nations.
Globalisation has created more job opportunities for people. In the past, when no transportation and communication means were present, people had to live and work in their local areas. Despite having skills, they had to work on farms or cottage industries. So limited jobs were available for people. But now, because of faster transportation and communication channel, people can travel anywhere in the world where more jobs are available. Many countries provide easier work visas to attract skilled workers from everywhere, which reduces unemployment in other countries. Work visa sponsoring nations also benefit from inexpensive labour from third world countries by producing cheaper goods and services. It is how they earn more profit. People who think globalisation is not beneficial, as citizens of other countries occupy their jobs, are unaware that cheap labour contributes to their country’s development, in turn, produce more jobs. Therefore, globalisation allows workers to migrate to any country and get jobs easily.
More coordination has also been brought by globalisation. Governments of all countries are now more connected comparatively the past. They help each other in several ways which were not possible before. If any mishap happens in one nation, it is considered a global concern. It leads other countries to help the victim nation. The people’s republic of china, for instance, sent hundreds of nurses and doctors to Italy to contain Corona Virus and take care of patients. It was not possible before globalisation because of the lack of faster communication and transportation mediums. Thus, cooperation has also increased due to globalisation.
In conclusion, even though some people think that globalisation has reduced jobs in their county, in reality, it has created more job opportunities by developing new businesses with the help of cheap labour. It also encouraged more cooperation among countries and led them to help each other. So globalisation is a positive development.
The demand for fresh water is increasing, but its level is decreasing in many countries. What are the causes of this problem? How the government and individuals can solve it?
Water is vital for every living being on the earth. But the gap between demand and supply of potable water is increasing in many places. The main reason for this issue is overpopulation and the plantation of water-intensive crops. The government policies to control the increasing population and crop rotation methods can increase accessibility to freshwater.
An unprecedented level of the high population has spiked the water demand. Now, the human population is more than ever before. Every person needs an adequate amount of water to carry out daily activities: brushing, bathing, washing clothes, more importantly, making food. The more the population, the more will be the requirement of water. This problem aggravates when people do not use water wisely. Thus, the water demand is increasing.
The cause of the reduction of surface and underground freshwater is the cultivation of crops that need more water to grow. Crops such as sugarcane and paddy are grown in some countries because farmers can earn more by selling them. These crops are in high demand, so selling them is also not difficult. But many farmers are unaware that these crops guzzle a lot more water than other crops. For many decades, they have been planting these crops. Despite this situation, the cultivation of these crops is pervasive. Consequently, water has reached its lowest level.
However, all these problems are easy to control. The government’s family planning policies can stop the rapid growth of the population and, in turn, less water demand. The government should incentivise parents having only one child. They should be provided with preferential treatment in government services and jobs, similar to a country. In this country, fathers and mothers of a single child get discounts on electricity, water and gas bills. They also get jobs more comfortably than parents of two or more children. At the individual level, the judicious use of water can also save more of it. But farmers need to change the traditional cropping pattern to save water. Instead of planting paddy or sugarcane, they should cultivate pulses, millet, lentils, and mustard that need less water. Avoiding the use of chemical fertilizers can also decrease the water demand as synthetic fertilizers need more water to develop crops fast.
In conclusion, the demand and supply gap of freshwater is widening due to more population, plantation of water-intensive crops and non-judicious use of water. But the government’s one-child policy can stop the population explosion, and resultantly, reduce water demand. Individuals can avoid reckless use of water and contribute to water saving. Stopping the cultivation of water-guzzling crops can be done by farmers. All these measures can increase the availability of freshwater.
In many countries, the amount of crime is increasing. What do you think are the main causes of Crime? How can we deal with those causes?
Crime is a threat to peace, and in many countries around the world, criminal activities are burgeoning significantly. The prime reason for the increasing crime rate is unemployment and sudden provocation. This problem can be tackled if the government and people work together to diminish crime.
Lack of work opportunities leads people to commit the crime. Money is crucial for sustaining life. Doing work is the only way to earn money and buy commodities. In many places, people can not sustain their lives as they are unemployed. They remain jobless and might not even fulfil their basic needs. Therefore, they turn to illegal ways of earning for livelihood. Another conspicuous cause of crime is a sudden provocation. In recent times, work-related stress and environmental stress have increased. In this situation, they have lost their internal peace and patience. Mostly, they remained impatient and easily provoked by anyone. Delhi police, for instance, revealed that in the last two months of 2021, eight murders were the result of sudden provocation. There was no enmity or benefit behind committing such crimes. Offenders did it in anger as they lost their patience quickly.
The contribution of the government and people themselves can diminish the crime rate. The government should provide work as per the qualification of people. It will aid them to earn money and sustaining their lives. Besides, giving credit on less interest will also help them obtain money for starting their own business. Hence, they will avoid illegal activities to generate money. Also, people should come forward to alleviate this threat. They should try to control their temper in this fast-paced world by doing brain exercises such as meditation and yoga. Such practices can help them to understand the situation carefully and then react. Having a calm mind and patience will deter them from committing any crime.
In conclusion, burgeoning crime poses a threat to many countries. Unemployment and the sudden reaction of people are the major causes of this increasing problem. The government and people can combat this situation by providing earning opportunities and being patient, respectively. Thereby, criminal activities can be reduced to a large extent.
Some people say that modern technology has made shopping today easier, while others disagree. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Technology has revolutionized each area of human life, including the way of shopping things. It is said that, nowadays, shopping for goods has become much easy because of modern technology, but others do not support this viewpoint. I advocate the former perspective because modern gadgets save shopping time and make this experience more convenient.
Advances in technology lead people to shop effortlessly by saving time and in a comfortable way. Before the advancement of technology, people had to travel miles to purchase things they needed. And they went to the local market where they had to visit many shops for buying their desired products, which were difficult to get from one shop. As a result, they wasted plenty of their time. But online shopping stores facilitate people to shop from their homes without wasting their quality time. It also does not cause any trouble to them. This new experience makes their shopping experience easier. An online store xyz.com, for instance, offers its visitors buying anything in a single place with just a few clicks. And they deliver the products to their customers’ houses within a few days. This hassle-free way is much easier than traditional shopping due to technology.
However, modern technology has made shopping much more complex. When people shop from traditional shops, they have limited options of products, which enables them to choose things easily. In contrast, technology provides people with infinite choices that might put people in a dilemma. They could not choose the best option. Hence, their shopping experience becomes complex. Even sometimes, they end up buying nothing because of confusion. Besides, difficulty in examining the quality of the product makes their shopping experience bad.
In conclusion, even though it can be cumbersome when the choice is to be made from numerous options, the way people do shopping has become easy owing to modern technology. It causes people to shop from their homes and save time. Therefore, I believe modern technology has made shopping more convenient and easy.
Some old people think that retirement life is happier, but it is not as happy as imagined when they retire. What are the reasons for this? Suggest some solutions.
Work and family responsibilities cause people to do work till their old age, and they hardly get time to enjoy themselves. Working people think that after retirement, they will enjoy themselves more because of enough leisure. However, reality is different from their imagination. The prime cause of their sadness is loneliness and less interaction with the outer world. They can be brought out of this situation with the motivation of family members and social groups.
Elders feel lonely when they start staying at home. Nowadays, most of the members of every family do work. When older people live at home, others go to their work. Even their grandchildren have to attend school. There is no one to speak with them, and staying at home alone arouses the feeling of isolation and loneliness. Another cause is that elders scarcely meet and communicate with their neighbours, friends and relatives. In old age, they become feeble and rarely come out of their houses. As a result, they have less chance to talk and share their feelings. Also, as they do not go to work, they have no possibility of meeting with friends. Thus, the absence of communication makes their life unhappy.
Life after retirement can be more pleasant if senior citizens get the support of family and non-governmental organizations. Families should motivate their elders to go outside and interact with others. Even in free time, grandchildren and other family members can accompany the older to eliminate their sadness. Besides, some social welfare societies should make old age groups and engage them in social welfare activities. In this way, older will get the opportunity to meet and interact with others. Also, it would help them to stay active and healthy. In Delhi, for instance, a non-government organization made a group of fifty retired people work in an orphanage on weekends. These senior citizens meet with children and teach them social values. Hence, this group helps society as well as combat their isolation.
In conclusion, some people think of living more content life once they get free from work. But they feel sad because they find this life boring, full of isolation and no communication. Their lives can become happier if the family encourages them to go outside and spend time with them. Social groups can also diminish their sadness.
Some people think that climate change reforms will negatively effect businesses. Other feel it is an opportunity for them. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Climate change is the biggest concern for human beings, so governments are taking measures to contain it. It is said that many businesses will be harmed due to climate change reforms, while others find it as an opportunity. Although it may boost the renewal energy production business, some car companies can be closed. I also opine that climate change reforms may reduce sales of many types of goods.
Climate change reforms can lead to the cease of many automobile companies. A majority of cars and other vehicles use petrol or diesel to run. These fossil fuels emit greenhouse gases after burning. Vehicles are considered the second main reason for increasing the earth’s temperature and climate change. So governments around the world want to stop the production of vehicles that use petrol and diesel. If the state orders to completely close the production of petrol and diesel vehicles, as a climate change reform, it can lead to the shutting down of many auto manufacturing companies. This is because the transition from producing one type of vehicle to another is not easy and cheap. Therefore, many companies will not withstand this stringent measure.
However, the government measures to control climate change can stimulate renewable energy equipment businesses. To contain, the emission of greenhouse gases, the state is promoting solar energy, wind energy and other green energy solutions. The government also subsidise this equipment so that more and more people buy it. Due to this, the demand for solar panels, batteries, connecting wires, windmill parts and other materials is increasing. It boosted the sales of companies that produce renewable energy system parts. Thus, the green energy sector has boomed manyfold since the states started taking measures to control climate change.
Nonetheless, climate change reforms are detrimental to a majority of businesses. All companies produce goods and use transportation systems to reach their products everywhere in the country. But governments want to reduce the consumption of petrol and diesel so that greenhouse gases are contained. For that reason, petrol and diesel prices are being increased more frequently. The less fossil fuels are used, the less will be greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, increasing the prices of fuels causes an increase in transportation costs, increases the product price and ultimately reduces the sales of goods. It harms the company’s profit. Thereby, businesses may face loss or closure.
To conclude, businesses that produce parts and equipment used to produce green energy get the benefits of the government’s steps to control climate change as renewable energy sources are promoted by the state. But automobile sector and companies that need transportation to transport their products face loss as the state discourages the use of fossil fuels. It will shut car manufacturing companies and many other businesses. Therefore, climate change reforms will adversely affect the business.
The education of young people is highly prioritised in many countries. However, educating adults who cannot write or read is even more important, and the government should spend more money on this. To what extent do you agree or disagree
It is never too late to learn, but timing is crucial for education. Many countries prioritise youth education, but spending money on providing the basic level of education to adults is vital. I disagree with this statement to a large extent because providing only reading and writing skills to adults cannot have much positive impact, and adults cannot pay full attention to studies at this stage of life. But they can become self-depended for some works.
Learning only reading and writing by adults cannot make them eligible for high-paying jobs. It is an era of computers, robots and technology. To get a good job, people should be highly skilled. They should have certifications from multinational companies. Apart from that, they must possess some high-level degrees. It is because nowadays, even non-technical graduates are unemployed. If adults learn only how to read and write, it cannot bring any significant change in their professional lives. There will not be any change or elevation in their career. So, the government should not spend money on adult education as it might only be a waste of funds.
Adults may lack the attention and willingness to learn new things, unlike children. Adulthood is the period of life when people have several responsibilities. They have to care for their parents, children and spouses, which stops them from devoting time to learning. Moreover, the attention span of adults is not on par with youngsters’ focus. A study, for instance, published in the journal “Age and Attention”, shows that the human brain focus starts diminishing by 0.67 per cent every subsequent year after the age of 25 years. So adults cannot pay as much attention to their education as youngsters. Consequently, money spent by the government on adult education might not yield the desired results.
However, providing adults with reading and writing skills can make them self-reliant for some purposes. An illiterate person cannot communicate by writing and never understand what is written, even in their mother tongue. They have to go to educated people to read letters and messages for them. Also, when they go to the bank, government offices or any other organisation, and if they have to write something, they seek the help of others. This dependence sometimes causes delays in getting services. But if adults can read and write, they do not require any help. Furthermore, They can improve their lives by reading books and newspapers and learning about the world around them.
In conclusion, educating youths have minuscule effects on their professional life because learning reading and writing cannot make them capable of getting white-collar jobs. Also, in adulthood, people have many obligations that stop them from focusing on education. So the government should not spend money on educating adults, and it is better to spend money on youngsters, who are dedicated learners at this stage of life. The only benefit adults can get by learning reading and writing is self-reliance for some limited purposes. Therefore, I disagree more with this statement.
