Nowadays, international tourism is the biggest industry in the world. Unfortunately, international tourism creates tension rather than understanding between people from different cultures. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Nowadays, international tourism is the biggest industry in the world. Unfortunately, international tourism creates tension rather than understanding between people from different cultures. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Tourism industry across different countries has given people the opportunity to expand their horizons and create new experiences beyond borders. While in some cases, this has created a collaborative effort for the hosts and visitors to enrich the experience of each other, multiple sections of the demography believe that it could also be counterproductive. This topic needs a deeper analysis.

In contemporary times, a trend being observed is the resurgence of a nomadic culture for travelers. This pattern is complemented by the empathetic nature of tourists  which often includes living, sharing and most importantly, caring for the natives of the host countries they are visiting, creating opportunities for the guests to naturally blend into a new cultural environment. The locals, who draw economic, as well as cultural enrichment,  also reciprocate by offering a receptive environment, in which those visiting feel at home. In a recent survey by Travel digest, it has been observed that 70% of host countries make it a cultural priority to ensure tourists feel welcome which helps create a strong and long-lasting bond with the native residents.

Nevertheless, the critics, as always, cite instances,  despite these being sporadic, where there have been tourists who have blatantly disregarded regional practices in a country even though such behavior stems from the entrants being completely oblivious of native ways of life. The disrespectful approach, as this lobby alleges, could occasionally create a sour experience for the hosts who often carry an incorrect impression of aliens. Another reason often cited for disgruntlement is the expansion of carbon footprint due to tourist activity: to cater to tourists, various services are established for which natives are made to bear taxes. 

In conclusion, the exaggeration of some inconsequential events to tarnish the image of this industry seems quite irrational and lacking in substance. Like every coin has two sides, tourism also has some darker shades, but it is surely doing a commendable task of creating bonds along with employment and business.   

Safety standards are important when building peoples’ homes. Who should be responsible for enforcing strict building codes – the government or the people who build the homes?”

Safety standards are important when building peoples’ homes. Who should be responsible for enforcing strict building codes – the government or the people who build the homes?”

Many feel it is important to abide by safety guidelines when constructing a residential unit. This has ensued a debate as to who should do it, some feel it should be the onus of the state, others believe it to be the prerogative of people.  

An overwhelming majority vouches for an active role of the state in this job. They are vested with the jurisdiction besides having resources to guarantee  proper adherence of pre-defined bye-laws. In case some are found disregarding those parameters, the state can take punitive actions like imposing financial penalties or even awarding imprisonments. It is said that fear of lawmakers prevails over all, and everyone tends to fall in line  with the state directives.

Moreover, undeniably, affording a  safe environment  to the populace is the state obligation. Thus, to see this through, they should act and  deliver their responsibility since if any mishaps occur resulting in injuries or loss of lives, they will be blamed for exercising slackness in affording protection to the populace, which may also precipitate into a huge financial burden they may have to extend to the affected people as a part of relief. 

However, some see that people themselves should comply with the prescribed safety parameters, for it is them who will be inhabiting those premises. Any disregard for pre-defined laws could jeopardize their safety and even result in loss of life. Even while buying a pre-constructed unit if they choose to overlook the guidelines, they may be red into buying an unsafe residential unit.  

Overall, although it may seem to some that the government should guarantee compliance of building laws, the role of people and builders cannot be overlooked. Eventually they are the ones who will have to bear the direct consequence of unwarranted events.

Some commentators feel that grandparents should live together with their children and grandchildren, while others say that elderly people should be encouraged to live independently. Consider the possible arguments on both sides of this debate, and reach your own conclusion.

 Some commentators feel that grandparents should live together with their children and grandchildren, while others say that elderly people should be encouraged to live independently. Consider the possible arguments on both sides of this debate, and reach your own conclusion.

Why live with extended family? 

• They become vulnerable to disease and ailments and need care 

• To lead a comfortable life in autumn years, when they are dependent on others for their daily errands 

• They will be able to get emotional support 

• They can fulfill the responsibility of perpetuating traditional and cultural values to the next generation 

• They can even support their family with their pragmatic vision and also financially with their savings and pensions 

Why live alone? 

• Freedom to live as per their wish, and  have time for themselves; enjoy hobbies, travel  

• They can also stay away from conflicts and be at peace 

• They can stay in a quiet and tranquil environment where there is no disturbance 

In times when family structures are undergoing a pragmatic shift, a question arises that should those in their twilight years live with their extended families, or should they be on their own. 

Those vouching for senior citizens dwelling in an arrangement that comprises three generations feel that they surely deserve to be among their loved ones when they need it the most. This opinion is based on the fact that these people sacrificed tremendously in their  youth to rear their offspring and made sumptuous sacrifices, so that that the latter could be afforded a comfortable life, so now, when they are aging, they need to be reciprocated in the same manner and bestowed upon with all the love and affection, making their golden years enjoyable, something every aged craves for. 

Similarly, as the age catches, one becomes prone to myriads of disease and ailments besides losing the ability to fend for themselves and perform even their daily errands comfortably without assistance, and  the likelihood of accidents and injuries witnesses an imminent increment. Thus, by being in such settings, they will be able to evade such circumstances, by virtue of always having someone besides them to tend to their health and afford them necessary assistance. 

Nevertheless, those in favor of  the elderly being in independent settings compare such a condition to  cloistered lifestyle that is away from all the commotion, disquiet and generational conflicts, extending them opportunities to exercise their will and devoting themselves to their favorite endeavors; seeking spiritual upheaval, or undertaking world tours, for example.  

Overall, despite both the views carrying substance in their own essence, I opine that it is quite appropriate for the aging to enjoy their golden years in the company of their families, with their children and grandsons and granddaughters. 

Some people feel that cities should allow for spaces for graffiti while others feel it should be banned. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

 Some people feel that cities should allow for spaces for graffiti while others feel it should be banned.
Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Allow. Why? 

• Can give artists, renowned and those who cannot afford expensive spaces to express their views freely 

• This is often used to convey messages to society 

• Can make dull and dilapidated  walls look colorful and scenic, adding to the beauty 

Not to allow. Why? 

• Such permission is bound to be used to vandalize and deface public spaces, important  public places and even private properties 

• Can cost several arms and legs to clean up  

Attitudes towards legitimizing graffiti in public domains have been ambivalent, by virtue of some being in favor of allowing such form of art, and  others proscribing it. 

There is strong advocacy for permitting presentation of illustrations on walls  and structures  since it is felt that this can afford an unprecedented opportunity to the artists to exhibit their creative side publicly, and earn  accolades and much required visibility. On a similar note, those enjoying a great reputation for their artistic expressions can present their masterpieces  to the populace, turning the dull looking neighborhoods into pleasing to eye surroundings. For instance, in countries like China and France, painters are allowed to draw fascinating motifs  and  even three-dimensional drawings on walls, roads and footpaths that intrigue the public and let them enjoy imaginative work; eventually, making them feel happy.  

Moreover, this can allow creating content to engender enlightenment among citizens, for public good at large, about various essential issues having a potential to impact the social environment and health, and inveigle a positive reaction to help circumvent catastrophic consequences. To corroborate, during the pandemic, municipal authorities world over, sanctioned such endeavors, which fetched rich dividends in the form of heightened awareness  about precautions and treatment of covid infection. 

However,  the cynical view vouching for restraining such undertakings draws parallels between this practice and vandalism that can cost several arms and legs to clear, clean and restore the affected  places. This kind of scribbling in public spaces has become a tool of deliberate defacing which criminals and vandals use purposefully to cause damage to structures.

Overall, even though fears reflected in the skepticism about this matter are not unfounded, I opine that graffiti should be authorized in certain spaces, but discreetly, to afford decoration to neighborhoods and business districts.  

Nowadays, it seems that different generations within the family spend less free time doing activities together. Why is that? Is it a positive or negative development?

Nowadays, it seems that different generations within the family spend less free time doing activities together. Why is that? Is it a positive or negative development?

Concurrent times are witnessing a bizarre phenomenon of young and old family members rarely being observed engaging in pastime endeavors together. This can  be attributed to myriads of causes, but it is impacting families unfavorably.  

Owing to a myriad of causes, young and old family members seldom engage in pastime together. This has exposed families to severe ramifications.   

This trend stems from availability of family members of both the generations at different times, driving each to pursue their leisure as per their convenience. The family structures have witnessed a great metamorphosis, with the majority living in nuclear units where most couples are working and often arriving home late, while their wards are left to fend for themselves, forcing everyone to be at their own device while indulging in recreational undertakings. Additionally, the meaning of entertainment has been subjected to a paradigm shift with older  members still resorting to the conventional ways such as being with family, for unwinding themselves, the younger generation being inclined to indulging with technology and outings with their peers to rejuvenate themselves, persuading them to choose their own ways.    

Only perceived consolation afforded as benefits by this propensity is that it helps avoid conflicts between parents and their children while choosing methods of relaxation since everyone can chase their own pursuits to entertain themselves and not hinder enjoyment of each other, letting the harmony in the family prevail. 

Nevertheless, such evolution is marred by major detriments; making both the generations alien and apathetic to each other;  eventually, creating a gap between them that is never blurred, causing separation in families in the long run. This vogue is often flayed for being responsible for youngsters, quite often adolescents,  going astray as they lack appropriate guidance in choosing suitable leisure pursuits. 

Overall, despite this evolution being predictable due to dissimilar timings and leanings, it is predisposing families to unwarranted consequences that are incongruous with societal principles at large, making it imperative to find ways to evade this trend.

Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems, as well as practical problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems, as well as practical problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Surviving in an alien environment without knowledge of local language can pose severe hurdles in various paradigms: 

·   Knowing about local customs and ways of life can become a difficult job; thus, never allowing migrants to effectively integrate withsurroundings 

·   Youngsters find it harder to settle down since they are unable to mingle with their native peers and often are subjected to slur 

·   Finding work can become an extremely arduous job 

·   Surviving in alien surroundings can be an onerous task: finding directions, knowing about places 

No issues arise today 

·         Virtual interpreters can help a great deal in overcoming linguistic barriers. 

·   Systems like GPS and google maps can help people find directions

·   Migrants go well prepared to handle such issues and try to overcome the barriers using their intellect with enthusiasm

Where language happens to be a fundamental medium of communication, it can also become an impediment in the way of social and professional integration, with the host society, of migrants. These challenges are virtually insurmountable and have a potential to make the life of new entrants into a country miserable.

Lack  of knowledge of native linguistic skills can make immigrants a subject of the wrath of the locals, who look at the former with suspicion and become wary of their presence. This tends to develop a mistrust between the both, creating a wedge and making it harder for the alien settlers to adapt effectively to local ways of life and customs. Several experts profess that the language happens to be the key to opening the doors to appreciating the aspirations and expectations of any community, and having the knowledge of native dialect can help bridge the gap between two cultures, but the lack of it causes misunderstandings, a common scenario observed in the case of foreign migrants and the hosts. 

Moreover, this impairment can make survival in an alien surrounding onerous: not only finding directions and moving around in cities and towns of the destination countries become a perennial struggle for the immigrating individuals but also finding a suitable employment turn out to be an uphill task. Various studies have shown that those migrating to other countries without knowing the local language are forced to survive without a job since they are deemed unsuitable due to lack of the ability to interact with the locals. 

Overall, I completely subscribe  to the notion that subsisting in a society without knowing its language can become an invincible challenge since migrants are not accepted wholeheartedly and they must endure hardships due to inability to find directions and employment. 

Private companies that support and carry out scientific research are spending more than governments these days. Do the advantages of this development outweigh its disadvantages? Explain and give your reasons.

Private companies that support and carry out scientific research are spending more than governments these days. Do the advantages of this development outweigh its disadvantages? Explain and give your reasons.  

Pros 

• Fast-tracking of project initiation: private players can arrange money quickly
• They can make modifications and also arrange extra resources if something goes  missing during the project 
• Appropriate use of resources: manpower and material 
• Time bound project: professionals involved are not given an infinite timeline 
• These concerns are exposed to the threat of losses, they innovate and bring improvements

Cons    

• Since private companies invest for profits, their products are generally too expensive and beyond the reach of the masses 
• These entities also sometimes tend to follow malpractices and launch products without testing for their safety. 

In contemporary times, the private endeavors have contributed tremendously in exploratory forays that are more than their state-supported counterparts; however, do the merits attained by such undertakings eclipse their pitfalls, is a matter that needs to be delved deeper into.

The lobby aligning with the idea that this phenomenon is affording humongous benefits asserts that when private players invest into R&D, they can initiate the project quickly by organizing funding, manpower and the whole process unlike the latter: their undertakings are not impeded by bureaucratic obstacles. They can raise money through different sources such as bank loans, or offering private equity, and so on. 

To corroborate, CCP Limited researched a myriad of coffee beans and their grinding at different ratios to offer topnotch coffee to Indians; took a five million Rupees loan from banks and completed the whole initiative using 50 personnel, faster than their government-controlled counterparts. Along with this, the former makes a constructive charter for the appropriate usage of resources : materials and force, and tries to complete the activity within a decided timeframe without any delays. 

Nevertheless, the skeptics bemoan this trend: the end products cost several arms and legs, making them unaffordable for the majority of middle and low income groups.  For instance, most of the life-saving drugs are way beyond the common man since they are patented by private pharma companies who discovered them. Also, these entities try to overcome their competitors by engaging in malpractices such as launching untested products, jeopardizing the health of society 

Overall, despite having some drawbacks, this evolution fetches a plethora of benefits: quick initiation of research, and a judicious use of resources. Thus, private participation in R&D endeavors should be promoted in every sector, except that concern welfare of the destitute.