Nowadays, it is more convenient and easier for people to travel to other countries. Is this a positive or negative development?

Nowadays, it is more convenient and easier for people to travel to other countries. Is this a positive or negative development?

In recent times, cross-border traveling for has become easier than ever before. Even though this is helping them acquire knowledge and discover new things and ideas, it does have some downsides.

Nowadays, as undertaking journeys has become cheaper and more comfortable, it is allowing people to see and experience disparate cultures more closely. Consequently, they are able to inform themselves about other cultures; expose them to heterogenous lifestyles, clothing, languages and food habits; and convince them that distinctiveness is perfectly normal, thereby making them more tolerant. Apart from that, now everyone can explore every corner of world, regardless of their economic backgrounds, and expand their list of destinations for leisure travel.  

On the flip side, this phenomenon also has some pitfalls. The main problem is that it is bad for environment since most of those going to other countries tend to fly, it is causing a rise in air pollution and also resulting in ecological destruction, by virtue of deforestation being accelerated due to the need for  bigger and more airports. 

Also, travellers may introduce new diseases to a place. For example, visitors to a new place often go to places where tribals live, making the latter vulnerable to viruses and bacteria, affecting their lives consequently. This can be corroborated by citing the  example of recent unrestricted proliferation of Corona Virus that citizens of one country  carried along with them and transmitted it to the hosts, causing pandemic as a result. 

In short, even though this evolution also has unfavorable consequences for the environment and host populace, the ease of traveling has certainly enabled more and more people to visit various places and learn about destination locations. Thus, this is a beneficial trend though precautions must resorted to in order to evade disastrous outcomes. 

Many think life will be better in future when robots will do most of the work done by humans. Do you agree or disagree?

 Many think life will be better in future when robots will do most of the work done by humans. Do you agree or disagree?

Before attempting to write an intro, plan what to write  

Look at the tone and also the scope of the essay 

Do you agree or disagree? Either side (clear stand in conclusion) 

With what (will) 

Will life be better with the advent of robots, or not? 

Yes?  

• Life will become convenient as people will be spared of efforts they invest to do their work

• Things will speed up and people will save time 

• Errors will be eliminated and precision will be achieved 

• It will save lives and ensure safety 

• New horizons will open up 

NO? 

• Unemployment will result 

• Loss of skills is another hazard: people will not be able to work in absence of power  

• Encourage sedentary lifestyle 

• This will create class conflicts and social discord, giving rise to crime 

There is a common perception that the advent of robots will make life effortless. Although this notion has fetched support from various quarters, there is some cynicism.

To start with, the optimism about life becoming uncomplicated is supported by the benefits automation will bring around. This will spare humans of the efforts they have to invest in negotiating various tedious and laborious tasks at work and at home, leaving them with ample time to spend on other more essential areas and relax too. For example, artificial intelligence could drive cars and vehicles for them, and let them travel in comfort without worrying about mishaps and getting tired of facing traffic as drivers. 

Besides this, these modern introductions could be of great assistance in reducing in affording safety. These machines would be able to work in hazardous conditions capable of jeopardizing human safety. To exemplify, in the recent pandemic, many healthcare workers were exposed to infections and in fact thousands lost their lives while treating infected patients, but with the availability of these devices in coming years, health care givers could be guaranteed safety as they will not need to go close to those affected individuals. 

However, even though it is undeniable that this invention is bound to make things easy for mankind, it will also result in unemployment, especially at the skilled and semi-skilled levels. This equipment will supersede human labor, precipitating into heightened joblessness, and thus leading to poverty, by making it hard for people to earn a square meal a day. 

Overall, although there are going to be some complications due to robots, life is bound to become easier if these machines are introduced. It is recommended by several experts that a prudent  approach can help overcome pitfalls.

Directors of large companies often receive much bigger salary increases than ordinary workers. Employers' organizations say that in the global market this is necessary to attract the best management talent. What are your views?

 Directors of large companies often receive much bigger salary increases than ordinary workers. Employers' organizations say that in the global market this is necessary to attract the best management talent. What are your views?

In contemporary times, several businesses have started following the practice of greater hikes to those working at director level, than common personnel in the pretext that this arrangement is essential to lure high fliers at global level. In my opinion this prospective needs to be critically analyzed 

At the outset, the Rationale driving this policy  suggest that professionals engaging in directorial endeavors subject themselves to  the daunting task of not only managing the whole organization efficiently but also deriving tangible outcomes from their functions, whereas a worker employed at a lower level is only responsible for a limited scope of duties. This difference makes the former the deserving candidates for steeper pay raises 

Moreover it is hard to deny that individuals working at such levels are equipped with extensive seasoning about dealing with diverse situations, formulating and implementing appropriate policies to surmount challenges and capitalize on opportunities, something that can only be effectively handled by a highly experienced professional. On top of that, they also bring along an expansive network of their global connections that helps enrich the experience of the organization that allows them to explore new markets and also grow their business footprint. Therefore they must be remunerated accordingly.

Having said that, there is some skepticism about this approach even though it is not so well-founded, that this disparity might cause disgruntlement among those employed at lower levels since they too have to bear extreme stress, and are responsible for implementation of policies and strategies. This could precipitate into lower productivity and higher employee turnover. 

In hindsight, disputes aside, I vehemently opine that this method of engaging experienced seasoned professionals for assignments at director level is completely justified by virtue of their experience and contribution to the organization.

Some people regard animals as the source of food or clothes. Others think that they should be treated like pets. Do you agree or disagree?

 Some people regard animals as the source of food or clothes. Others think that they should be treated like pets. Do you agree or disagree? 

Modern thought favors treating animals as companions rather than a resource of nourishment and clothing, but there are voices of dissent on this notion. I shall be analyzing this statement and the contra view, and conclude whether this is an agreeable notion or not.  

Many treat the traditional opinion about animals being a part of nourishment and clothing provision with contempt and feel that these creatures  should be meted out fair treatment and be considered as companions. I, nevertheless, fail to subscribe to this notion.  

To start with, there is a strong opinion against this notion - which is also justified to a certain extent. It cites the age-old practice, where humans have interacted with their co-inhabitants of the planet by rendering them shelter and, in exchange, using them for feeding the human population, in the form of dairy products such milk, butter and cheese, to name a few; and meat and eggs. Had these beings not there, it is believed that the human race would not have survived - it debuted as hunter gatherers who started populating various parts of the planet - and would have perished and disappeared.     

Having said that, the lobby of animal activists puts its weight behind the proposal  that animals should not be abused for personal objectives of mankind. They profess that creatures are also creations of nature, and thus  man does not enjoy ownership over them. Therefore, no one has the right to exploit these creatures for various purposes, or inflict pain and death upon them. These beings deserve to be treated as companions and family members and rendered due care. Moreover, in times of extensive development of technology that spans across the field of food production - enabling artificial synthesis - there is little rationale left in using these creatures.  

Conclusion: we have to agree or disagree (no middle path) 

Overall, even though the reasons quoted in support of this statement hold true to a certain extent, I fail to concur with it since if humans started abandoning use of animals as source of nutrition and clothes, many would perish and chaos would descend. 

Nowadays we can see definite signs of surplus production in almost every industry sector, and this is leading to environmental damage. What are some possible solutions to this situation?

 Nowadays we can see definite signs of surplus production in almost every industry sector, and this is leading to environmental damage. What are some possible solutions to this situation?

Excess production in manufacturing sector has become the order of the day it may a seem to be sign of economic prosperity to the economists, the environmentalists are least amused, and are instead worried about the ecological disaster this phenomenon is causing they stress on finding workable ways out to get rid of this pressing problem.

The most prominent solution/suggestion comes from within the manufacturing sector where experts recommend a closer coordination between marketing, manufacturing and research and development departments, besides rationalizing distribution channels. The evil of over production stems from over-reporting of sales by marketing departments. If this practice could be stopped, excessive production would automatically be halted. Thus preventing indiscriminate exploitation of natural resources and emissions from fuel used in production process.

Many, also go to the extent of stalling or research and development activities-carried out to in fuse innovation in the existing products, and discontinuing production until the existing stocks are not consumed completely. This would not only keep pollution a bay for some days but also make the society realize the importance of producing only that much which can serve the purpose of humanity.

On top of that, a school of thought goes to the extent of introducing statutory regulation and reforming the habits of the consumers. It is suggested that the governments across the world should resort imposing heavy penalties and punishments for the manufactures who tend to produce more than what they can sell. This should be complimented by convincing the users not to abandon there equipment or dispose of others goods and instead reuse them.

Hence, surplus manufacturing is surely an end-product of consumption oriented society, but this is damaging the health of the planet. Therefore, remedial steps are the need of the hour and should be implemented without delay and without compromise.

The best way to understand other cultures is to work for a multinational organization? Do you agree or disagree

 The best way to understand other cultures is to work for a multinational organization? Do you agree or disagree

Do you agree or disagree

Yes the best way to learn about foreign cultures is to engage professionally with an MNC 

• People come in touch with others from disparate backgrounds and learn about their ways of life 

• They know about festivals and other occasions through holidays and other celebrations 

• When these people travel to offices in other locations for their work, they interact with their colleagues 

No

• People take up jobs to just fulfill their professional aspirations and earn money, and seldom bring culture into the picture 

• They rarely socialize with others and maintain an arm’s distance 

• Most are dealing with their overseas counterparts through online resources and there is hardly any shoptalk or exchange of personal views  

 

As per a common perception, working in a multinational organization can help one familiarize themselves with disparate ways of life from across the world. In my view, this notion needs to be critically analyzed. 

Those  aligning themselves with this perception find support in the assumption that the environment in such organizations afford opportunities to interact with colleagues from overseas locations and enrich the knowledge of workers in terms of language, attitude, festivals and customs, to name a few. It has been seen that those employed in such establishments are exposed to their counterparts through regular associations being effected with the help of video conferencing, or traveling to  offices in other locations. Such contacts help inform people about various ways of life prevalent  in the world.

Having said that, the former view has certain flaws. It is hard to discount the fact that the majority are inclined to keep their professional and personal lives apart, and rarely dilute them. Their primary objective of joining any organization, including a transnational corporate, is to earn a livelihood to support themselves and their kin, and in these establishments they get better paid, and knowing about other cultures is neither on their priority list nor they are afforded such chances due to their hectic work schedule.

 

Similarly, professional engagements with the multinational can at best render global visibility to professionals but enlighten them about customs and beliefs populating this world since due to a great difference in aspirations most are wary and rarely have trust on each other, impeding cultural exchanges between them. 

Overall, even though this notion might hold some relevance, it can hardly be concurred with since those employed in companies with global presence have tight schedules and rarely have faith in their overseas colleagues. 

Global warming is one of the biggest threats humans face in the 21st Century and sea levels are continuing to rise at alarming rates. What problems are associated with this and what are some possible solutions.

 

Global warming is one of the biggest threats humans face in the 21st Century and sea levels are continuing to rise at alarming rates.

What problems are associated with this and what are some possible solutions.

Global warming and rise in sea levels have emerged as a major threat to mankind in the modern era. It has become an alarming situation for many politicians and environmentalists thereby, making many experts scramble for the associated consequences  and the plausible solutions for this pressing challenge.

Undoubtedly, global climate change has already had an observable effect on the environment, it is believed by the environmental experts that there are still other occurrences which might take place simultaneously like loss of sea ice, accelerated sea level rise and longer, more intense heat waves to name a few. Consequently, affecting the ecological balance adversely. In the long run, there is a great possibility that the environment may become incompatible for life, causing extinction of not only flora and fauna but humans too.

There are several ways to overcome this challenge and reduce its effect on the planet, one of the prominent solutions suggested by experts involve the contribution of government and individuals – it is to resort to the eco friendly measures like  switching to the non- polluting energy resources such as wind and solar energy to generate electricity, instead of using fossil fuels.

Moreover, switching to sustainable transportation and infrastructure can also act a credible preventive measure to surmount global warming. Promoting the use of public transportation, carpooling, and also electric modes transit can help cut down emission of carbon dioxide. Besides this, reducing the use of air conditioners and heating systems in domestic and commercial buildings can help in conquering this major perilous phenomenon.

In hindsight, I personally feel that although the environment is on the edge of total collapse, a lot can be salvaged and impending danger can be averted by adopting appropriate measures at all levels: individual and social.

In many countries, the legal driving age is 18 years old. Some people believe it is the right age to learn how to drive a car, whereas others say that the minimum age should be 25. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

 

In many countries, the legal driving age is 18 years old. Some people believe it is the right age to learn how to drive a car, whereas others say that the minimum age should be 25. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

 

 

Whether legal driving age should continue to be 18, or should it be raised to 25 is a profoundly debated matter today. Both the partisan factions cite justified reasons in support of their views.

Rendering permission to freshly turned adults to drive seems to be quite a viable practice. This view is based on the rationale that when young individuals attaining the age of 18 become liable to pay taxes, exercise their franchise by casting their votes, and also legally join employment, why not afford the privilege of driving four wheelers. Also, as grown-ups, they become obligated to their families, and having permission to drive can prove to be an asset: as they can share the family obligations and contribute by helping negotiate certain outdoor chores like shopping, or travel to work, without needing assistance of their elders.

Nevertheless, the  cynical lobby is up in arms against such an arrangement even though their fears are unfounded. They propound that those have just attained adulthood may be able to handle any responsibility but when it comes to driving,  it is a different realm altogether: something that needs a great sense of empathy towards other road users; ability to suppress temptation and adventurous spirits to respond to challenges, which is not the forte of those just turning 18. Thus,  individuals should only sit at the steering wheel when they are mature enough, at 25, an age scientifically proven to be quite suitable for such a task.    

Overall, I strongly feel that even though suggestion of raising the driving age may seem to be lucrative, it is not at all practical in the current scenario at least. Young adults deserve to be extended the right of being able to drive on their own at 18.

Some teachers think that a program of international exchange visits would benefit all teenage school students. Do you think the benefits of such a program would outweigh any disadvantages?

 Some teachers think that a program of international exchange visits would benefit all teenage school students. Do you think the benefits of such a program would outweigh any disadvantages?

 

Formal tuition is introducing innovative ways to develop and improve the quality of knowledge imparted and one such step involves tie-ups with their counterparts across the world facilitating international school exchange initiatives. This essay shall elucidate the pros and cons of this system.

To embark upon discussion, there is a lobby that strongly vouches for this arrangement as it paves way for umpteen merits: the learners get an opportunity to comprehend the world beyond their socio-political boundaries and develop a global perspective, broadening their horizons as a result, helping them forge relationships with learners hailing from disparate cultures. This can go a long way in preparing young minds to appreciate diversity and brush aside their tribal attitudes, a pivotal parameter for survival in a highly globalized world. It is firmly perceived that such programs can help  establish a society that will learn to live in harmony, regardless of being populated with distinct aspirations.  

Having said that, some are skeptical of such a policy, albiet their views not being well-founded. There are concerns about the exorbitant expenses being incurred when learners from a country travel to another, the burden of which must be borne by parents, often exposing them to unwarranted financial burden. Some also express fears that by virtue of being easily influenced pupils in their teens might not be able to readjust back into their routines after returning back to their home countries. This can have a profound impact on their academic performance. 

To cap it all, controversies aside, even though there are some alleged pitfalls of such exchange endeavors, the favors fetched are far more than the former. Therefore, it can  be safely asserted that the latter outshine the former by miles, and thus, must be promoted.