Some people believe that hospitals should spend more money on new medical technology, while others argue that those funds should be allocated to doctors and nurses. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

 Some people believe that hospitals should spend more money on new medical technology, while others argue that those funds should be allocated to doctors and nurses. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

A fierce debate has ensued regarding the investments in the healthcare sector, some assert that it is paramount to allocate funds to state-of-the-art methods and medical equipment, whereas some posit that prioritizing medical caregivers is necessary. I would analyze this notion profoundly while hunting with hounds and running with hares. 

Channelizing  monetary resources to equip healthcare environment with up-to-date medical tools: modern scanning machines, laser treatments, lab test, to name a few  will prove to be a blessing; this will assist the professionals to diagnose the diseases precisely, and at an earlier: cancer at an early stage, resulting in dispension of a better treatment to the patients, in terms of surgery, medicines, tests, and many more. 

Additionally, the technologies: AI,  could aid healthcare teams to save invaluable time; most of the tasks will be undertaken by robots. The automatic machines will complete their duties independently, saving immense time and human intervention required to finalize treatments, speeding up the process and mitigating waiting times for those ailing. To corroborate, implementing AI in the USA has precipitated relief for the sick as they can now access regular checkups and necessary therapies quickly.

However, doctors and nurses play a vital role in the medical care, and thus must  get precedence; these specialists boast of the expertise required to assess, prescribe and alter treatments; and monitor progress of those suffering from disease, disorders, and so on, something irreplaceable. Similarly,  technology can never mimic humans; the latter can provide ill with human touch and empathy - motivation and positive attitude to overcome disease, and many more.

In hindsight, both technology and staff are pivotal to an effective healthcare framework. Therefore,  both must enjoy equal relevance when thinking about investing resources for improvements; ignoring any of these would engender an imbalance.

Some believe that the government should support artists like musicians, painters, and poets, while others argue that this is a misuse of funds.

 Some believe that the government should support artists like musicians, painters, and poets, while others argue that this is a misuse of funds. 

Discuss both views and give your own opinion

Why? These people do not have resources to support them 

• They represent the culture and tradition and help perpetuate these  further: this has been historically proven 

• Their work reflects the condition of society 

• These people have a pivotal in bringing around revolutions

• They are also responsible for helping society become visible 

This is wastage of money 

• Funds could be used to alleviate problems like poverty 

• Funds could be used to carry out research and improve technology 

The idea of the state affording financial support to those performing various kinds of arts, invites mixed views, with some supporting this, others rejecting it. 

The advocates of such funding propose that individuals engaged in realms of music, painting, and poetry, to name a few, enjoy a special position in society; they are the sole medium of perpetuating the knowledge and wisdom, accumulated by ancestors over the eons, about history, culture, rituals, and traditions, down the generations. In absence of these societies would lose its identity, due to being disconnected from its past, and fade away soon. However, these exponents lack money to survive and carry out this critical duty, making it imperative for society to bolster them, and policy makers being the true representatives for the country must take ownership in this endeavor. 

Similarly, these art practitioners don other important roles of entertaining and informing the inhabitants of the nation about the conditions of their surroundings, and challenges facing them. To corroborate, poems and songs, especially the traditional genre, have not only amused their audiences but also helped them to enlighten themselves about social evils/stigma, and persuade them to abandon such practices.

Nevertheless, those critical of such initiatives tend to present the same old argument that these monetary resources instead of being squandered in such useless undertakings, would have been used to alleviate illiteracy and poverty, and render better healthcare and amenities to the marginalized, but their different objections fall flat as preserving all manifestations of art is as crucial as progressing.

In hindsight, the critics will be critics, and bound to doubt every noble move, nonetheless extending all possible assistance to musicians, poets, and so on, should continue, for this is the only way to sustain continuity of social and cultural values.  

Introduction 1

The public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with the issue that should the state afford financial support to those performing various kinds of art. While some are in favor of this, others profess that the monetary resources could be used in other more critical areas.

Introduction 2

There is a fierce debate between different schools of thought when it comes to the issue of the state affording financial support to those performing various kinds of art, since some are in favor of this, others consider it as a useless exercise, and recommend better use of resources.

Introduction 3

Some people think that when recruiting, companies should aim to take on people who are innovative and able to work independently while others consider they should recruit people who are able to work in a team and follow instructions. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Some people think that when recruiting, companies should aim to take on people who are innovative and able to work independently while others consider they should recruit people who are able to work in a team and follow instructions. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

A fierce debate has ensued regarding the factors that the businesses should consider while hiring personnel: some advocate opting for those who are resourceful and can operate autonomously, whereas others vouch for ones with ability to engage as team members. I feel both the perceptions hold substance; selection depends on the typical organizational needs.   

Appointing employees with the ability to execute tasks using their imaginative traits without any external guidance, or intervention can help an organization to run independent profit centers. Such individuals are internally motivated, and are capable of making decisions, and completing the work without needing continuous supervision.They are generally well-adapted to functioning in remote locations, project based undertakings, and carrying out research in disparate areas, where autonomy plays a paramount role and obstacles: consistent control and interference from other departments, are missing. To corroborate, Elon Musk admits  Tesla benefitting from this model by engaging creative people in independently-managed endeavors aimed at discovering new technologies: their premier product, the electric car.  

Nevertheless, barring a few venues where inventions are targeted, most other departments of modern undertakings must be populated by the staff that can synchronise their jobs with their counterparts in other divisions, by virtue of their operations and productivity hinging on the efficiency churned out by others sections. To exemplify, the business turnover of the sales department heavily relies on efficient execution of tasks by manufacturing and planning, supply chain management and after sales service. In these cases communication, collaboration, and sharing of responsibility take the center stage, mandating employing efficient team players.

In hindsight, selecting personnel with ingenuity and capability to operate independently, or opting for ones to function in a group, depends on distinctive requirements: their aim is to create the best fit that can help attain organizational objectives.        

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. 

Antisocial activities, undoubtedly, are a menace for society, and several policies are adopted to vanquish this social malady, but can something really help make surroundings safer from unlawful elements is fiercely debated. While some express pessimism, others reflect optimism.  

Some lobby behind the notion that measures adopted to impede unlawful acts can make a huge difference. Reformation is a potent tool that makes those engaged in illegal endeavors to reform themselves and join back the mainstream. These include training criminals in alternative trades to allow them to make a living without harming others. Too corroborate, in India, in the 1980s dreaded dacoits of the notorious Ravines of Chambal were offered general amnesty and land to help them to adopt socially acceptable ways of life. This had a phenomenal impact as most of the notorious brigands such as Phoolan Devi reverted to civil life and also served as the member of parliament. 

However, the skeptics argue that antisocial activities are driven by socioeconomic conditions like poverty, unemployment and illiteracy, forcing the affected individuals to resort to illegal methods to fulfill their needs. Moreover, the class struggle between the affluent and the deprived also causes people to embrace unlawful ways  to bridge the gaps. Further, it is undeniable that unless the nexus between the antisocials elements and their patrons from influential class is not breached, nothing can bring a change as those committing infringements walks scott free and are emboldened to repeat those endeavors. Thus, if the root causes are untouched, all efforts will remain futile. 

Overall, while measures of dissuasion might not completely eradicate crime, it can significantly mitigate its impact and contribute to safer society. Combining a variety of approaches and engaging all stakeholders can lead to a more comprehensive and effective crime prevention strategy.

Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?

Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?

• To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?

• Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. 

Why make law? 

• Initially people will follow the legal statute without question

• Gradually, they will start understanding the relevance of recycling

• Others will also take up the practice 

• After a generation has passed, this exercise will become a social ritual    

Why not? 

• Law will be too harsh a step: recycling is a  relatively new concept in rudimentary stage 

• People do not have knowledge and resources 

• Spreading awareness is a better way

• Monetary benefits 

It is suggested by many that recycling should be made a law to persuade the domestic sector to embrace it completely. How far this proposal can be deemed acceptable is a matter that needs critical analysis before arriving at a plausible verdict.

To commence with, it has been observed that all efforts and resources invested in persuading households to recycle the refuse at homes, have failed miserably, and the production of the garbage continues (unabated) without restrictions. Therefore, turning this system into a legally binding obligation will force everyone to follow it without giving it a second thought since its non-compliance will invite penalties and punishments, which no one will be prepared to bear. For instance, when the government of New York, in 2020, imposed the blanket ban on pressure horns within the city, every New Yorker immediately removed these equipment from their vehicles. 

Similarly, it is undeniable that when someone, even out of fear, starts practicing/following  a procedure, they start comprehending the relevance behind such an exercise, and make it an integral part of their daily regime. To corroborate, after helmets were made compulsory in India, some had registered their protest, nonetheless gradually, they realised how significant this safety gear was for their life, and now every two-wheeler rider in India uses it. Moreover, such a move will help ensure that the current and the subsequent generations start reusing their old material as a part of their everyday routine. It has been experienced that when one adopts something as their habit, their children  take it up as a ritual.

In hindsight, only a law can encourage a quick response from  the citizens and  force them to recycle their household waste and unused material without reluctance, and eventually make it a social custom.  

Introduction 1

Recycling may have become a buzzword, but it is felt that this process is not being embraced  whole-heartedly by the domestic sector, so to make it a regular regime it is suggested that a law should be enacted to make it mandatory for all. I concur with this proposal in absolute terms, and shall elaborate my stand in the following paragraphs.

Introduction 2

Should long-term job-seekers in receipt of government benefits be made to do voluntary work so that they give something back to the community?

 

Should long-term job-seekers in receipt of government benefits be made to do voluntary work so that they give something back to the community?

Should the state persuade those people who have been jobless since a long time and have been receiving unemployment grants, to do some free services?  

 

If yes 

• These people would help the state save some money otherwise invested in hiring paid workforce. This way, these individuals would be doing something productive for society. 

• This would also enable the government  to convince tax-payers that their hard-earned money is not being squandered to help unproductive people. 

• Idle mind is the devil’s workshop:  This could also help the jobless themselves: they would stay away from depressing thoughts, or participating in illegal activities to overcome boredom. 

• *********These people could also strike a job in alternative fields when they work in those fields as volunteers.  

NO

• This could make them feel dejected and alienated, as they are not jobless because of their fault, but have been trying to get jobs. Working in those occupations may hurt their sentiments and take a toll on their self-esteem. 

• Others could also follow these precedents and may leave their jobs to work in voluntary services and earn unemployment benefits. This would be disastrous for the society and the economy 

Several countries extend long term grants to the jobless, but should the latter be engaged in community services to reciprocate for the social support, it is a matter that needs to be delved deeper into before arriving at a plausible conclusion. 

To begin with, involving the recipients of long-term unemployment benefits in unpaid services would enable them to pay back something to the society in the form of savings made in monetary terms. These individuals would replace the paid labor in various spheres and expertise; consequently, governments would be spared of paying salaries and other benefits. For instance, a similar policy has been implemented in various provinces of Australia, has created a win-win  situation for both, the benefactors and beneficiaries as local regimes can use the funds saved for such endeavors to support the unemployed.

Similarly, this could prove to be extremely favorable for those without a job: they could use their spare time to do something productive, instead of going astray and embracing illegal activities, or suffering mental affliction, like depression. Additionally, they could also foster skills, and network, in alternative trades, which could land them an employment.

Nevertheless, there is a darker side to this arrangement despite it remaining uncommon, for it might have  a knock-on effect by virtue of some following the precedents of their jobless counterparts, and embracing such settings. This could reduce the number of people engaged in active economic endeavors that generate value. However, these fears lack substance since few want to remain jobless: surviving on subsistence money is not a voluntary choice. 

In hindsight, although those with a job, and getting the state support, engaging in unpaid work is an individual prerogative, this scheme can prove to be exceedingly rewarding for the affected individuals and the society.      

Introduction 1

The great public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with the issue whether the jobless beneficiaries of government grants since long should engage in community services as a means to reciprocate for the social support, with some supporting this proposal, and others rejecting it. I feel this should be an individual prerogative and not a forced decision.

Introduction 2

Engaging the jobless beneficiaries of government grants since long in community services is a proposal that even though that seems to be the best way to reciprocate for social support, I feel this should be an individual prerogative and not a forced decision.

Introduction 3 

Some people believe that hospitals should spend more money on new medical technology, while others argue that those funds should be allocated to doctors and nurses. Discuss both views and give your opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

 Some people believe that hospitals should spend more money on new medical technology, while others argue that those funds should be allocated to doctors and nurses. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Why technology 

• Help in better diagnosis and dispension of treatment - medications and surgery 

• Faster and better treatment - reducing convalescing / recuperating period 

 Why doctors and nurses 

• Medical caregivers are the ones who can interpret findings by machines 

• They are the ones who using their experience dispense treatment 

• They are one who nurse back the sick to good health 

• The human touch 

Several lobbies are found sparring over where investments should go in healthcare: state-of-the-art methods and tools, or medical care givers. Undeniably, the role of both is indispensable, so I recommend striking a balance between these two areas. 

Infusing  resources into augmenting technological aspects of the medical domain will certainly help introduce sophisticated instruments and apparatus, and techniques, to assist in diagnosing the disease with unprecedented accuracy, and rendering interventions, like surgeries, precision. To corroborate, ultra-modern MRI machines can pinpoint the affected areas, which a human eye cannot do, and robotic surgeries are helping surgeons perform their task with unprecedented perfection, heightening their skills exponentially.

However,  although engendering modernization in the equipment and strategies in hospitals is paramount, it is said that “You cannot be half pregnant”, and thus, physicians and nursing staff cannot be disregarded: they need to be allocated a similar weightage. Undeniably, assessing the symptoms and severity of ailments is the human forte, and no device can emulate this; the latter can only spit out figures and numbers, while correctly interpreting the figures, and deciding the extent of treatment is only possible through human intellect.  

Additionally, it is the medical practitioners and other workers who use their empathetic  approach to aid the ailing in recuperating. There have been several instances where even the most hopelessly sick have managed to get back on their feet, and convalesce, owing to the moral support and friendly approach of doctors and nurses. Thus,  it is imperative to acknowledge their contribution, and render them resources to help uplift their skills and spirits, as well. 

In hindsight,  allotting equal importance to both the avenues:technology and health professionals is extremely essential since turning back towards either of them would create imbalance and chaos and turn the healthcare environment inefficient.

Intro 1 The debate surrounding investments in different avenues in healthcare is the most heated, with some proposing prioritizing state-of-the-art tools and methods, others vouching for medical care givers. Both the partisan factions cite plausible reasons to bolster their views, but I am in favor of striking a balance between the two. Intro 2 There is a serious debate over the issue as to who should be allocated priority for investments in healthcare: some propose that it should be state-of-the-art tools and methods, others vouch for medical care givers. This essay shall profoundly analyze this discourse and exhibit its support for both the opinions.

Many people argue that restaurants should be required to disclose the nutritional information of the dishes they serve. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

 Many people argue that restaurants should be required to disclose the nutritional information of the dishes they serve.  Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

• Many people argue that restaurants should be required to disclose the nutritional information of the dishes they serve.  

Advantage 

• Customers will be able to decide how much to consume as per their body proportions 

• They will be able avoid food that has ingredients that can cause them allergic reactions or affect their health adversely 

Disadvantage 

• This could creating misplaced notions about food consumptions habits and lead people to only calculate calories instead of consuming food 

• The food could become expensive since restaurants would need to carry out research and also take more time to prepare since the measured will have to be accurate for each preparation. 

• TAKE THE SECRETS AWAY 

Eating out is an exciting opportunity for all as they get to escape the mundane of cooking at home. However, will it remain exciting and beneficial enough if they were informed about nutritional content served to them in the delicacies they consume. Thus, it becomes imperative to compare pros and cons of this proposal.

On the effulgent side, consumers will be able to assess the quantities of various ingredients being ingested with each serving, and decide upon portions to eat as per specific calorie requirements. Those conscious about their weight, girth of waist and overall health, could enjoy their favorite cuisines without harboring qualms about jeopardizing their physical appearance and well-being by surrendering to temptation to gratify their taste buds.  

Similarly, another conspicuous reward of this policy is providing an effective safeguard to those susceptible to food allergies; it will become easier for one to assess the condiments and  substances used in preparation of delicacies and  circumvent having nourishment that can  cause adverse reactions. This will particularly assist those having sensitivity to soy, fish, peanuts, and  citrus and acidic content since these have a potential to cause skin rashes and also respiration disorders. 

On the obsidian side, the only prominent downside of this policy is forgoing culinary innovation and surprises; everything used in preparing dishes will be made public beforehand, leaving little for those dining to explore the texture and flavor. Similarly, this arrangement might make eating out expensive since restaurants will need to research ingredients and list them on the menu,  thinning the crowds of visitors as only the elite will be able to afford outside food. 

In hindsight, although there are some downsides of this proposal, considering the favorable impact it is bound to have on the public health at large, it will be quite appropriate to suggest application of this norm as a salient feature of food services afforded by every restaurant and food joint.  

It is proposed by many that eateries should mention the nutritional value of each delicacy they serve. While this practice carries certain benefits, it remains to be seen whether these outsrip detriments.

       

Social media has both advantages and disadvantages for different segments of society. Discuss and give your opinion in not less than 250 words.

Social media has both advantages and disadvantages for different segments of society. Discuss and give your opinion in not less than 250 words.

Benefits 

• Helping students  and professionals build community networks, exchanging their knowledge and expanding their horizons 

• Businessmen can now build alliances and also reach out to their intended audience 

• Communities can share their concerns, and also spread and perpetuate their interests and culture 

• Everyone can know about current events from common people 

• The marginalized can advocate for their rights, and also access facilities like education 

Drawbacks 

• This has become a platform for launching rumours, often causing social discord 

• Privacy is compromised 

• Cyberbullying has also common, wherein an individual can become a subject of wrath of others 

• Addictive and making people lose their focus on other important areas 

• Affects  mental health 

Introduction 1

The advent of social media has  revolutionised the way people connect and share information and views, making it imperative to analyze the benefits, and drawbacks, this way has fetched for different sections of society. 

To start with, this state-of-the-art platform has helped students, and professionals, to connect with their counterparts within their own region, or across the globe, share and exchange their views, and knowledge, helping  find quick solutions and also broaden their horizons on any given topic. To exemplify, numerous medical trainees and practitioners admit forming communities on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, among others, to seek expert advice, share details of diagnosis and treatment, and effects of medical intervention.

Similarly, the virtual social interaction applications have empowered even the marginalized sections that can now voice their opinions, exhibit their concerns, access services extended by regimes, and also advocate for their rights, with the help of online groups belonging to their own communities. To corroborate, since the inception of this channel a decade ago, sizable populations of the destitute in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and so on, have flourished; the internet-based activism has forced governments to work to alleviate miserable conditions of their poor citizens.

Nevertheless, despite proving to be extremely rewarding, the use of digital communal interaction media has also raised concerns about users being exposed to misinformation, and stalking and bullying. To exemplify, people have admitted forming ill-feelings towards other communities after falling prey to rumours, promoted on social platforms, and also being harassed for asserting their views on their virtual accounts.

In hindsight, although there are certain challenges that social media has brought along, the way it has impacted society positively is unprecedented, making interaction more effective and meaningful. The shortcomings can be overcome by embracing judicious policies.

Introduction 2

Undeniably, social media has fetched umpteen benefits for different sections of society, but it is hard to overlook the drawbacks associated with it. This essay intends to critically analyze both the aspects, and derive a plausible  conclusion. 

Introduction 3

Some argue that social media has fetched umpteen benefits for different sections of society, but others believe that one has to face numerous drawbacks. The following paragraphs shall discuss both the aspects, and share a plausible conclusion.