Some people believe that manufacturers and supermarkets should minimize the packaging material used. However, others think that consumers should avoid heavily packaged goods. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

 Some people believe that manufacturers and supermarkets should minimize the packaging material used. However, others think that consumers should avoid heavily packaged goods. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

In contemporary times, a profound debate has ensued whether manufacturing and retail industry should dissuade from the excessive use of packing material, or customers should don the mantle of restricting themselves from buying such things.

A lobby is of the view that manufacturers and supermarket owners are the trend setters and can change the fashion as per their convenience. Therefore, any action taken at their end will nip the evil in the bud and will act as a permanent solution to this problem. As it has been observed that customers purchase what is offered to them and have very little or no choice when it comes to essential products; thus, prudent actions taken at the level of manufacturers can halt this evil practice and result in miracles.

Moreover, producers and sellers are using packaging as means to attract the shoppers and to gain an edge over their competitors, in order to increase their sales. Therefore, it is essential that they on their part should avoid the packing material unreasonably. Besides this, following the above proposal will turn out to be a beneficial exercise as the amount invested in this segment will get reduced, reducing their cost per unit.

Nonetheless, there are a few who feel that it is consumers who have the potential and power to turn things around faster and discourage this wasteful practice by abstaining from purchasing such products. If they adopt such measures, those involved in producing and selling will have to respond quickly, and transform their packing strategies, or bear the unsold stocks.    

To sum up, by analyzing both the views, both manufacturers, supermarkets, and customers should forgo the heavy use packaging. This will have an enduring  impact since the unreasonable use of raw material and energy will be curtailed. 

Some people believe they should keep all the money they have earned and should not pay tax to the state. Do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe they should keep all the money they have earned and should not pay tax to the state. Do you agree or disagree?

Making a livelihood with a lot of hard work and then paying hefty taxes to the state,  has always prompted a growing number to propose not to pay taxes to the state. The other side, however,  believes that one should pay some proportion of their income for the larger public good.

Some perceive that one should enjoy all of their hard-earned money; generally, middle income groups pay a handsome proportion of taxes as compared to the others, but the state treasury still lacks sufficient amounts for welfare. Therefore, policy makers must find other routes to generate revenues, such as encouraging tourism, foreign investment that will establish new industries, which will increase exports and more businesses. This would generate money for the state. Eventually, minimizing dependence on the taxes paid by citizens.

On top of that, there is profound apprehension about the fate of earnings going in as levies because there is complete absence of transparency regarding the use of the public money. Many propose that due to rampant corruption a few influential  and the powerful siphon off monetary resources  to fill their coffers, leaving their countrymen high and dry.  

Having said that, the other school of thought still considers that every penny contributed to the national income will help law makers invest into the welfare of citizens and ensure national security, and also into venues that will aid in bringing prosperity. In other words, the financial resources grossed from levies is channelised into establishing infrastructure, elaborate healthcare and education, besides centers that could boost and augment industry and trade. 

Conclusively, my inclination is disagreement towards the statement. Nonetheless, regimes are also equally responsible for  reducing the burden of taxation, if not abolished completely, and provide a corruption free system for the nation.

Multicultural societies bring more benefits to the country than drawbacks. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Multicultural societies bring more benefits to the country than drawbacks. To what extent do you agree or disagree?    

The issue of living in multicultural societies has become a matter of profound debate among the communities all over the world. Some consider this approach as a beneficial method of bolstering their economies and forging new alliances. But, others find it as a means of distorting their heritage and value.

Embedding multicultural societies in a country renders multiple opportunities not only to individuals but to the entire nation. Bringing different ethnic groups together offers an opportunity for youngsters to learn various languages that can aid them in their academics, by referring to the same topic in different vernacular and come up with a better understanding of any issue.  

Besides this, such societies can avail and explore several possibilities for trade and expanding business horizons. The biggest beneficiary of such a setting is the economy since such a nation is dotted by mushrooming new industries and ventures to meet the typical needs of people of specific ethnic groups and society at large. Thus, leading to growth in decent employment and economic value.

However, others find societies populated by people from diverse sociocultural backgrounds as a recipe for disaster. They believe that as too many cooks spoil the broth, similarly, the presence of a large number of citizens from different origins  dilutes unique cultural identity; destroys the ancestral values of a country and of its aboriginal communities. The presence of diverse ethnicities influences and blurs traditional beliefs and causes natives to overlook their own culture and learning. Thus, resulting in weakening their customs and rituals of their origin.

In hindsight, after due consideration of both perspectives, I personally feel that having multicultural societies has become a need of the hour, as joining hands with different societies can ensure long term internal and external economic, and political stability.

In many countries it is easy to apply and to get a credit card. However, credit card debt causes many problems and is hard to pay back. Do you think the advantages of credit cards outweight the disadvantages?

 In many countries it is easy to apply and to get a credit card. However, credit card debt causes many problems and is hard to pay back. Do you think the advantages of credit cards outweight the disadvantages?

Nowadays, it requires little effort to acquire a new credit card, but does the use of this new tool prove more rewarding, or is it more of a bane, a matter that needs a profound analysis.  

To embark upon the discussion, this form of plastic money has made life literally effortless in many ways: there is hardly any need to plan a budget before going out shopping; one can make purchases anytime without having to depend on carrying money. For instance, while paying bills at the cash counter one might fall short of cash, in that case, one would either pull out some items from the cart, or rush to an A.T.M. Moreover, users of these facilities can avail exciting offers: discounts, reward points, and so forth. In a crisis, many middle-class people depend on credit cards for their daily living and they get a certain time period to make repayments to the banks. 

Nevertheless, there is always the other side of the coin. It has been observed that  while using this mode of transacting many often end up spending more than what they afford, which pushes them into serious financial troubles, making  them vulnerable to exorbitant penalties, fines, and a poor credit rating, and so forth, and  eventually,  crises, stress, worries, and anxiety, among others. Furthermore, since the proliferation  of this form of money, instances of bank frauds all over the world have also witnessed a steep rise, making people pay back for the purchases they have not done.  

To recapitulate, every coin has two sides, but credit cards are laden with a plethora of advantages, which eclipse all the pitfalls. Hence, I believe that one must make prudent use of such privileges.

Nowadays, more people move away from their friends and families for work. Does this development have more advantages or disadvantages?

 

Nowadays, more people move away from their friends and families for work. Does this development have more advantages or disadvantages?

Merits 

• One can access better work opportunities: 

• better compensation, 

• faster career growth 

• Great job satisfaction 

• One can  focus on the work dedicatedly

• Build resilience and broaden horizons, making one resourceful by allowing one to forge wider professional network 

• Afford better facilities to their loved ones back home 

• 
  

Demerits  

• It can strain personal relations 

• Cause alienation with children and relatives 

• One cannot be a part of celebrations of moments of sorrows 

• This can also cause homesickness 

Historically, humans have been shifting to other regions in search of livelihood leaving loved ones back home, but in recent times, this phenomenon has gained momentum, making it imperative to ascertain whether it fetches more merits than demerits.

Intro 2

Contemporary times are witnessing rising incidence of shifting to other regions, away from loved ones, in search of better livelihood. Even though this offers myriad merits, the demerits associated with this phenomenon are hard to disregard.

To begin with, this practice can prove to be extremely rewarding in the form of affording abundant opportunities for rapid career progression. One does not only become vulnerable to better and broader employment openings but also greater job satisfaction, and higher  compensation. When one moves to bigger cities, they are exposed to a wealth of openings laid at their disposal by a slew (variety) of large organisations offering jobs as per skills, and wages that are the best in industry, and they are  not impeded by family obligations. For instance, software specialists relocating to an IT hub independently: Bangalore, or Silicon Valley, from their hometown can easily access top-notch IT firms: IBM, Apple, TCS, and so forth, and gain higher salaries, guaranteeing unparalleled financial growth and stability, without needing to address family concerns. 

Moreover, this arrangement allows humongous  savings; when they migrate alone, they do not need to pay out of their nose to arrange accommodation,and other facilities, for their expenditure as an individual will be negligible and the resources preserved can be used to render better lifestyles to the near dear ones back home.

Nevertheless, the only pitfall presented by this system is the feeling of homesickness, and sometimes loneliness since one is miles away from their kith and kin. However, this can be overcome effortlessly today due to the advent of technology:it is easy to stay in touch with loved ones with the help of social media and video calling.

Hence, it can be safely asserted that moving to distant locations, leaving families and acquaintances behind for the sake of work, can be extremely beneficial and easily eclipse any shortcomings

Some say that due to heavy traffic governments need to build more roads in metropolitan cities, while others argue this isn’t the right solution and may fail to help. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give your reasons and examples.

 Some say that due to heavy traffic governments need to build more roads in metropolitan cities, while others argue this isn’t the right solution and may fail to help. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give your reasons and examples.

urban 

Why should new roads and bridges be constructed? 

• This will help create a bi-furcation between those traveling within a limited area and those traversing across the city

• This will create more lanes for a variety of vehicles, rendering smooth flow at speed

Why should this proposal not be implemented? 

• The problem stems from every rising populace and poor public transport network and any expansion made in the city pathways will soon be overcrowded by cars and other means   

Might cause more problems. 

• Can prove to be a recipe for disaster since it will cause ecological destruction

• Such addition is likely to create more development around the new roads and cause not only more traffic but also pollution in formerly untouched areas 

Solutions 

• Improving mass transit systems

• Imposing systems like odd-even 

• Not allowing entry of heavy vehicles for some hours into certain busy roads

The debate surrounding ways to find easing congestion on urban roads is the most heated. While some suggest that the state should build more roads, claiming it would be a suitable solution, others believe it would exacerbate the problems. The forthcoming paragraphs shall look into the matter thoroughly and share a plausible conclusion.   

To begin with, a lobby professes that construction of new roads and bridges would help in creating a bi-furcation between those traveling within a limited area and those traversing across cities, ultimately decreasing the density of congestion of automobiles on the current roads. This will create a time saving ecosystem as a massive amount of time is wasted in intensive road jams, different routes for different suitable vehicles will make commuting much faster and also keeps a less chaotic environment. 

Similarly,  this move will help create more lanes for a variety of vehicles, rendering smooth flow at speed, resulting in a healthy driving environment. For instance, the advanced lane system in the city of Mumbai has resulted in fast traveling; motorists have reported saving at least 2 hours everyday that they used to exhaust while reaching their offices in mornings and back home in evenings.  

However, some feel this proposal will only waste money as they believe less roads are not the main reason for traffic jams; the rising population is one of greatest factors affecting road traveling. To add to woes, poor public transport networks force urbanites to opt for their conveyance. Thus, any expansion of pathways will be soon clogged with more vehicles.    

Overall, I believe that building new pathways is a great idea and will go a long way in mitigating the problem of traffic, providing ease of traveling to road users. Therefore, I completely agree with the idea.

.

What other ways can be used to ease the traffic 

Cosmopolitan - urban sprawl tends to include villages also 

Metropolitan - no villages only

In the future all cars, buses and trucks will be driverless. The only people travelling inside these vehicles will be passengers. Do you think the advantages of driverless vehicles outweigh the disadvantages?

 In the future all cars, buses and trucks will be driverless. The only people travelling inside these vehicles will be passengers. Do you think the advantages of driverless vehicles outweigh the disadvantages?

Advantages 

• Fewer mishaps due to lack of human errors 

• Violence on roads will decrease

• One can enjoy rides instead of struggling with negotiating traffic snarls 

• Since automated vehicles will drive at constant and  predictable speed, fuel consumption will fall, causing lesser emissions, and thus, pollution. 

• New roads and bridges will not need to be built since machines will not be driving recklessly and causing jams 

Disadvantages   

• Loss of jobs of those who rely on this occupation

• Loss of skills, exposing people to catastrophe if these vehicles fail operate because Of any reason 

• Technical malfunction or hacking could compromise safety 

• The charm of driving, a leisure time for many, will vanish.

With technology slowly infiltrating every work of life and more recently expanding its footprints in the domain of commuting, it is being predicted that it will supersede the role of drivers, but does this possibility carry more promises, or challenges is a matter that needs a profound analysis. 

Intro 2

The proliferation of robotics into transportation has made many to extrapolate that very soon the road of drivers may be superseded by technology, but will this change bring more promises, or challenges , is a matter that needs a profound analysis.

To commence with, automated modes of commuting are likely to afford a major benefit to those currently forced to undertake strenuous task of sitting behind the wheels, and predisposing themselves and others to mishaps, sometimes fatal, resulting  out of an error, or poor judgement; these mediums will be equipped with the state-of-the-art devices and facilities to respond instantly to the dynamic environment on the road, and save precious lives. Concurrently, over 1.2 million road users, and about 2 billion animals and birds, succumb to severe injuries caused by being run over by human driven vehicles every year globally. 

Similarly, this introduction is likely to prove extremely favorable for the environment since self-driven automobiles will not resort to reckless driving, and mindless overtaking and braking, thereby mitigating fuel consumption, and eventually, emissions  and pollution. As per US Transport board, these imprudent driving habits tend to increase the fuel consumption by at least 28%, resulting in heightened air pollution. 

Nevertheless, the only predictable detriment of this change is the loss of jobs  for those who survive by earning by driving, but this proposed predicament will not endure for long as people will switch to alternative occupations. Historically, every innovation has met with the same resentment; nonetheless, displeasure has turned into delight  and new ways have been embraced happily. 

Thus, it can be asserted that autonomous and intelligent vehicles will fetch more rewards and easily outclass any pitfalls: this technology will redefine travelling and ensure safety of mankind and other creatures, besides helping the planet.

Some say that due to heavy traffic governments need to build more roads in metropolitan cities, while others argue this isn’t the right solution and may cause more problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give your reasons and examples.

 Some say that due to heavy traffic governments need to build more roads in metropolitan cities, while others argue this isn’t the right solution and may cause more problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give your reasons and examples.

What other ways can be used to ease the traffic 

Cosmopolitan - urban sprawl tends to include villages also 

Metropolitan - no villages only urban 

Why should new roads and bridges be constructed? 

• This will help create a bi-furcation between those traveling within a limited area and those traversing across the city

• This will create more lanes for a variety of vehicles, rendering smooth flow at speed

Why should this proposal not be implemented? 

• The problem stems from every rising populace and poor public transport network and any expansion made in the city pathways will soon be overcrowded by cars and other means   

Might cause more problems. 

• Can prove to be a recipe for disaster since it will cause ecological destruction

• Such addition is likely to create more development around the new roads and cause not only more traffic but also pollution in formerly untouched areas 

Solutions 

• Improving mass transit systems

• Imposing systems like odd-even 

• Not allowing entry of heavy vehicles for some hours into certain busy roads

Nowadays, urban traffic congestion is the main area to work upon. To mitigate this challenge, some urban planners profess constructing new roads and flyovers. Nevertheless, the other lobbies are against this notion. The following paragraphs shall delve deeper into this matter.  

To begin with, almost every urban area is suffering due to road congestion induced by heavy jams and poor road planning which consumes a humongous amount of time  while commuting, and in case of emergencies, it is difficult to reach from one to another location quickly. However, constructing new roads and making a better road plan can aid in the situation, resulting in time saving and better travel experiences: this approach will enable creating different lanes according to the class of vehicles shortening the traveling time. 

To corroborate, a pilot project was implemented in London, wherein additional lanes were constructed on the main pathways connecting central city and suburbs. This proved to be a resounding success: this helped speed up the movement of buses and cars, especially during rush and school hours. The users reported saving at least thirty minutes on one-way journeys, thereby alleviating their  stress levels too. 

Nonetheless, some quash the hopes being reflected in the former opinion, and fear that this is likely to precipitate failure and waste of resources  and money. They feel, any new additions in pathways and flyovers would soon be occupied by more automobiles: the problem lies in rising population and poor mass transit systems, abandoning urbanites to be at their own device to travel and they must opt for their own means.      

To conclude, disputes and criticism aside, I completely concur with this proposal, and feel making new roads will prove to be a helpful initiative in resolving the urban traffic imbroglio.  

In the future, nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

 In the future, nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Agree 

• The way people are becoming busier, it is expected that they will have no time to go to a shop, or wait for their books to be delivered, and will switch to soft versions 

• No one will be interested in paying to buy printed versions  when they can access everything online

• No one will love to carry heavy books and tedious oversized newspapers when they can read everything on their compact devices   

• A majority will become environmentally conscious and switch eco-friendly modes 

Disagree 

• Many will still remain passionate readers of printed versions 

• When every sphere of life will be driven by technology, many will consider accessing these conventional means as a way to break the mundane 

• Many will try to avoid using virtual means to remain away from health issues like weakening eyesights 

• Many will not be so tech savvy 

• There will still many areas that will be out of bounds for power, technology and network and one will still have to depend on these traditional means 

Introduction 1 :-

Ever since virtual technology entered the domain of imparting knowledge about various subjects and current events, many have started using it as their main source of staying up-to-date, giving rise to a speculation that the printed text will soon become a thing of the past, but this doomsday prediction may not completely hold true. 

Introduction 2:- 

The way more and more are shifting towards virtual mediums, and shunning paper-based text, to access knowledge, and updates about current events, engendering  speculations that the latter will soon become a thing of the past, but I feel this prediction may not be completely true. 

The  soft versions of books, and newspapers will gain favours from an increasing numbers of readers owing to unprecedented convenience these offer: one does not need to wait for paper based material to be published, or arrived at the doorstep, for one can get the latest inputs through e-papers, articles,  portals, and e-journals, to name a few, as soon as , they are uploaded. Similarly, the future generation will have little time to compile, and consult multiple resources due to limitations of space, and affordability; they will be able to store huge data in their portable handheld devices. These factors will turn conventional means obsolete. 

Moreover, the rising enlightenment about environment protection will surely push many to go for paperless tools as this will discourage deforestation, and help the planet. Eminent environmentalist Dr. Prabal Sharma has confirmed this after assessing the views of over 2 million people, especially youngsters, world over who admit favouring this medium due to its eco-friendly nature. 

Nevertheless, the conventional mediums, despite losing followers, will continue to exist, by virtue of acting as a healthy distraction for the billions forced to engage with technology in every sphere of their life: ranging from professional work to entertainment. Likewise, few alternatives can offer similar relaxation as paper-based versions, and many will continue with this conviction. 

Therefore, both the new and the old methods of transferring information will continue to co-exist, and the latter will be used by an ever increasing number of humans to escape the mundane during leisure. 

Some people say that there should be a single official international language. Others oppose this idea. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Some people say that there should be a single official international language. Others oppose this idea. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

For 

• This will help in eliminating ambiguity 

• Render communication for cultures across the world speed and ease, fostering homogeneity and harmony due to creating grounds for a better understanding.

• Affording trade and  business clarity; making deliberations easier among counterparts from different parts of the world. 

• Help in evolving global policies on various matters of paramount importance  more easily: environment, trade policies, crime prevention 

• Let forego huge investments otherwise made on translating and interpreting communications. 

• **Render equal voice to all nations. 

• Make  it easier for the people to exhibit their talent and  get employment  anywhere in the world. 

• Make it easier for people to get education in any part of the world.   

• Help tourism flourish and allow people to travel to diverse locations without inhibitions

Against 

• Many nations, especially marginalised societies claim it as an attempt by the affluent nations to impose their culture on them: language and culture are intricately entwined, and promotion of one will lead to spread of the other. They draw parallels between such a move and neo-colonialism. 

• Many also fear that this may lead of disappearance of native language and culture; people, especially the young,  will start abandoning the use of their native tongues, making perpetuation difficult, leading to extinction. This will be a great loss to mankind, since each language is a huge repository of wisdom accumulated by ancestors over the ages. 

• An expensive proposition for many countries: they will have to allocate  huge financial outlays and make fundamental changes in education to expose locals to that language. 

In contemporary times,a school of thought propounds that a universal global language can help eliminate communication barriers, while other lobbies oppose this notion. The following paragraphs shall delve into this debate, and draw and share a logical opinion. 

To begin with, an army of people is quite optimistic about the outcomes of such an arrangement; this will aid in transcending hurdles and impediments erected  by linguistic barriers, allowing unambiguous  communication and exchange of ideas, and fostering homogeneity and harmony for creating better understanding amongst the global citizens. Moreover, this approach will enable individuals to obtain education from anywhere in the world; and they can exhibit their talent and gain employment around the globe. In addition, it will make travel and tourism flourish by  allowing people from different countries to travel without inhibitions of not being able to communicate in alien environments effectively.  

However, the skeptical lobby is up in arms against this proposal and suggests this approach can be harmful for millions of native speakers, especially hailing from impoverished societies, as it will make them lose their heritage. The younger generation will abandon and  move away from their native heritage and tongue, it will make perpetuation onerous, causing the demise of local cultures and ancestral wisdom since language happens to be an infinite repository of knowhow about a culture and region accumulated over eons. Additionally, several marginalized nations claim it as an attempt by the affluent nations to impose their will and ways of life, and slowly gain control over them.  

Overall, although imposition of one universal language does have some shortcomings that are supported by fears about extinction of several weaker vernaculars, having one mode of communication will be in the larger interest of the world; and pitfalls can be overcome with prudent policies.    

Some say that if anyone would be given a choice between ‘not working’ and ‘working most of the time’, they would choose not to work. Do you agree or disagree?

 Some say that if anyone would be given a choice between ‘not working’ and ‘working most of the time’, they would choose not to work. Do you agree or disagree?

Why some think having goals is essential for youngsters 

• In personal, social and professional paradigm, this provides a purpose to life 

• Teaches about devotion to a goal

• It keeps one motivated 

• One learns to find ways to attain those, 

• bringing them knowledge, 

• experience and broadening their perspective by facing thick and thin,

•  and of course making them creative 

• Brings financial, social and personal affluence  

Why some think about not having goals 

• It can make one self-centered 

• Chasing objectives exposes one to hardships; facing stress or overwork, 

• Go into a disconnect from those around: staying away from nears and dears, abandon social relations 

• If one fails to accomplish their goals, one feels dejected and lost 

• Expose one to physical and mental ailments   

Intro 1

When it comes to defining objectives for the future, many feel that this should be a mandatory practice for young individuals. However, the other lobby exhibits its disinclination towards the former suggestion. The following paragraphs shall delve deeper into this matter and share a justified conclusion. 

Intro 2

Some people suggest that it is essential for the young generation to define what they want to attain in their life, whereas the other lobby is disinclined/disinterested in subscribing to this practice. This essay intends to delve deeper into this debate and emanate a justified conclusion.

Intro 3 

While it is true that the young generation should establish some objectives to give a purpose to their life, some are averse to this practice, for they fear this might deprive them of enjoyable moments.  

To start with, determining  (discerning) aims at a young age affords a clear vision for future in all walks of life: personal, familial, social and professional, and act as roadmaps that one uses to tread to fulfill aspirations and expectations of diverse realms/spheres, and experience satisfaction. To exemplify, Dr. Nikita Dudeja, a famous human behavior specialist, professes that the youth with an eye on the future are more organized and content since they get to see things happening as per their expectations, and enjoy the exploits of their planned efforts. Such  individuals are known to lead a happier life than their directionless counterparts. 

Similarly, this propensity can make one vulnerable to new skills, inventiveness and a hard working approach. To corroborate, Professor Uroosa Khan, University of Technology, Toronto professes that, the goals persuade the energetic young individuals to find ways to surmount barriers obscuring their targets, garner proficiency, and discover radical solutions to reap their desired outcomes. 

Nevertheless, there is some skepticism about this habit; some fear that this might predispose them to hardships, and mental and physical afflictions, tying them to their obsession of gaining access to things they dearly crave for, and making them work recklessly, thereby detaching them from their families, social circles and surroundings, robbing them of the opportunities to enjoy their life, and making things miserable for them. 

In hindsight, even though the reservations against harboring ambitions might hold some substance, a life without aspirations, and expectations, is bound to be without direction and structure, and make things chaotic in the long run.