Individual greed and selfishness have been the basis of modern society. Some people think that we must return to older, more traditional values such as respect for the elders and the local community in order to create a better world to live in. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Individual greed and selfishness have been the basis of modern society. Some people think that we must return to older, more traditional values such as respect for the elders and the local community in order to create a better world to live in. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

AGREE   

• Some people think that we must return to older, more traditional values such as respect for the elders and the local community in order to create a better world to live in

• Yes we should revert back to old perspectives. Why?   

• Old thought meant more close communal life where there was empathy towards each other 

• Everyone will help each other again and share their things 

• Relations will be more valuable than money 

• People socialized more and stayed healthy 

• Social responsibility will be more valuable than personal benefits, precipitating a dip in crime  

NO 

• There will be return of social, ethnic and gender bias: resulting in perennial class struggle, a common scenario of the past  

• There will frequent wars 

• Dissemination of education will become difficult due to socioeconomic hurdles 

• People will be  stereotyped in one profession, halting all chances of progress 

The way the contemporary social environment is witnessing the rise of self-centered approach, some social behaviorists have started proposing reversion to the conventional ways of life that prioritized society over individualism. However, this endeavour cannot be undertaken in absolute terms, by virtue of it bringing several complications.

At the outset, those propounding abandoning the modern system, and embracing the old ways of life found their argument on the fast deteriorating respect for cultural aspirations, and expectations, wherein everyone is competing for superiority, and in the process disregarding the existence of others, precipitating disrespect for social norms, and co-inhabitants. Such apathy could lead to chaos, and loss of customs and rituals, and eventually, the demise of society. 

Nevertheless, even though this perception is the true indicator of concurrent perspectives, it is certainly impossible to espouse the lifestyles followed, and the conventions observed, in yesteryears; society has come a long way by transcending orthodox barriers of cultural, ethnic, and socio-economic disparities: the sole cause of perennial (continuous) social unrest, biases, and violence. The current arrangement has empowered everyone by offering equal opportunities to all, like even the formerly deprived can now realize their dreams through resources afforded to them by egalitarian(equal) regimes.

Similarly, breaking the professional stereotype will become a far cry since everyone will be forced to engage with the occupation, their families have traditionally followed for eons, unlike, today, even the son of the farmer can become an IT expert, something made possible by a radical shift in the thought process that promotes exploration.

In hindsight, reconfiguring societal norms as per the ones that existed in the past completely is impractical, for it will give rise to the prejudices humanity has abandoned; thus, only traits like empathy should be integrated with contemporary expectations.

Crime is a problem all over the world. Some believe that crime prevention will make no difference, others disagree. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

 Crime is a problem all over the world. Some believe that crime prevention will make no difference, others disagree. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 

Globally, unlawful activities are increasing drastically. Some believe that dissuasion from such endeavors will remain a far cry despite use of various deterrents to cull such acts, but others are optimistic about the outcomes. In the forthcoming paragraphs, I will analyze both the sides of coins and share my inclinations.

To start with, a majority believes that poverty and unemployment are main factors driving antisocial elements to break laws as they find it easy to earn a livelihood effortlessly. Moreover, many are becoming addicted to partaking in these endeavors due to rising costs of surviving and shrinking incomes, undertaking deviant  ways can help them supplement their earnings. Similarly, some consider these illegal activities as adventurous that help them portray their bravery to others surrounding them such as peer groups and communes. These factors cumulatively influence the impact of steps taken to alleviate the number of felonies adversely, rendering every policy enacted to discourage criminal activity useless.  

However, some believe that punishment can even turn even the hardened lawbreakers meek as it incites a fear among them about the consequences such as imprisonment, levies and even capital sentences. These measures can disincline them from taking laws into their own hands since no one wants to stay away from public life, or be executed. A survey by Law Firms found that in 2020 there were more than 100 cases of antisocial activities registered in a city, and when they compared their data with 2021, they found that the felony rate had reduced by 50% by just slapping stringent sentences on those committing  illegal acts.

To conclude, I strongly believe that law enforcement needs to come down with an iron hand to curtail incidence of unlawful acts. This can help in mitigating crime if not eliminate it completely. 

When it comes to research on family history, some people prefer not to dig into the past, instead they just focus on their future. Discuss both views and include your own opinion.

When it comes to research on family history, some people prefer not to dig into the past, instead they just focus on their future. Discuss both views and include your own opinion. 

Many opine that exploring what one,or their ancestors did in gone by days, is worthless and one should look towards the future, but there are voices of dissent, nonetheless, suggesting that this might be impractical action, and have unfavourable effects.

Many opine that ignoring the family past deprives one of several benefits. Such a practice gives an opportunity to discover the values and culture of family of concerned individuals, a miss. This could be very helpful, especially, during hiring workers, or looking for a suitable matrimonial match. A well-rooted and cultured person will prove to be an asset but not exploring the background might result in selection of a wrong person which can impair the new relationships in making. 

In addition to above, information of family background is very incumbent for learning about the genetics and heredity of an individual. This data can be very useful for medical practitioners, and researchers, for treatment, or developing remedies for lethal diseases and ailments. Nevertheless, forgoing the exhaustive investigation of family history, will make it impossible to pinpoint the source, and intensity of  afflictions, and recommend suitable medical intervention.   

Having said that, others are skeptical of this view, fear that it can have unfavorable consequences. The information extracted might be misleading; it cannot be guaranteed that the process for gathering inputs was reliable and unbiased; thus, casting a shadow on  the legitimacy of facts. On top of that,  revelations of gone by days might prove to be a traumatic experience for many, causing psychological setbacks, propelling people towards depression and anxiety. 

In hindsight, despite there being certain pitfallls attributed to this proposition, I opine that change is inevitable and it must be embraced gracefully without prejudice; therefore, it is practical to overlook the need to delve into the backgrounds.  

It is difficult for people in the cities to get physical exercise. Why is this the case? What can be done to solve this problem?

 It is difficult for people in the cities to get physical exercise. Why is this the case? What can be done to solve this problem?

In contemporary times, a growing number of city dwellers rarely involve themselves in exercise routines. In this essay, I will be discussing the causes behind this trend, and propose the possible solutions. 

To begin with, nowadays, umpteen urbanites are forced to invest their time in attaining professional goals, and overlook  their wellbeing. The reason for this is the rising work pressure. This has resulted in lesser and lesser time being available for physical workouts. Moreover, for some, traveling to a health club might be a waste of time due to long-distance travel. Traveling from one place to another every day could be a headache for them. Furthermore, another reason could be the environment. Most of the urban locales are facing high air pollution levels forcing a majority  to stay indoors for the sake of their health. Thus, keeping one away from any kind of physical efforts. 

However, this problem can only be solved by encouraging people to act smartly. They should negotiate with their employers about either shortening the working hours or arranging facilities within the offices, like gyms, to facilitate physical activities. Likewise, the urban populace should be encouraged  to use parks rather than visiting fitness clubs, or arrange physical activities in their house gardens. Similarly,  policy makers should also intervene and make it mandatory for every authority involved in urban planning to create, and provide space for green buffers and parks in residential areas so people do not have to travel distances or face pollution while exercising. 

In conclusion, it is true that most urbanites are involving less and less in physical activities due to many reasons. There are, however, several steps that can be taken to overcome this challenge, wherein both individuals and authorities can play their part.  

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