In marriages today, some argue that it is the responsibility of both spouses to earn a living for the family.

In marriages today, some argue that it is the responsibility of both spouses to earn a living for the family.

Yes

• When there is a talk of gender equality in every sphere of life, why should this duty be left to only one gender 
• Millions are spent on educating women and empowering them, so they must also use their knowledge for the betterment of their kin. 
• The current era when the family system is influenced by nuclear settings, it is difficult to make ends meet without both the partners sharing the responsibility. 
• The cost of living is rising in every manifestation: education, accommodation, and so on which cannot be met with a single earning member 

NO

• Conservative approach relies heavily on the predefined duties: men are begetters and women are meant to rear the offspring and look after household chores 
• Both spouses should not work as it can affect the children adversely: the duties should be shared one looking after the earning and the other the family obligations 

Even though dual-income households might seem more practical to some today, I fail to concur with this system; it is bound to precipitate unwarranted challenges. 

Those advocating this suggestion base their argument on the perceived gender equality. They profess that when both sexes enjoy similar privileges, gain comparable education, and so forth, there is hardly any rationale left to vest this duty in only one spouse, generally males, to strive to support their family single-handedly. Sharing the burden of earning livelihoods can render respite to earning members, and contribute to comfortable lifestyles. 

Moreover, investing millions into educating and empowering women has become a new normal, making it imperative for them to work to help their kin make their ends meet. This would not only allow them to use their education meaningfully but also help ensure better standards of life, and a secure future for their progeny. However, these benefits are ephemeral, and carry challenges obscured from immediate view.  

Nevertheless, this perception is fraught with complications: affording quality upbringing to children becomes onerous; both parents face time constraints when it comes to spending time with their offspring, making the latter go astray due to inadequate monitoring and counselling: a common malady plaguing juveniles today. Additionally, marital discord is another ramification of this approach; spouses rarely spend time with each other owing to long working hours, thereby straining relationships. As per  Office for National Statistics, steeply rising incidence of divorces among working couples are attributed to married partners not devoting attention to aspirations of each other.  

In hindsight, disputes aside, notwithstanding the short term gains, in terms of rendering financial stability, this approach is destined to engender disruption in familial relationships and unfavorably impact rearing of the next generation, something that could have enduring impact on families.   

Subjects at schools are selected by authorities such as the central government (not by the teachers). Some say that these subjects should be chosen by teachers. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Subjects at schools are selected by authorities such as the central government (not by the teachers). Some say that these subjects should be chosen by teachers. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

A meticulously  curated study plan plays a vital role in the  holistic development of learners, and this responsibility has traditionally been shouldered by state-backed bodies due to the uniformity it renders. However, some suggest that such an initiative should be handed over to the educators, but I disagree with this view and lend my support to the continuation of the current system.   

Teachers usually have time constraints as a virtue of myriads of reasons: completion of the syllabus, preparing pupils for both interschool, as well as intraschool competitions, maintaining administrative records, and to name a few, and meanwhile, if such work were allotted to them, this would affect the teaching-learning process. In addition, due to lack of updated data and handouts, there will be complete failure to sensitize the creative minds.

Moreover, there will be major variations in syllabus, and learning methods, in many regions across institutions within the nation, hampering the future goals, and career opportunities, of young learners in higher education, and professions. For example, if schools do not impart computer science, and artificial intelligence at the school level since some educators failed to determine its relevance, learners may encounter challenges in enrolling in their dream jobs.

Furthermore, some invest their complete faith in national authorities, by virtue of them being equipped with the sufficient dexterity , and resources to provide standardized education. Likewise, the policy makers can decide to incorporate several subjects based on future economic demands that will not only help futuristic expertise but also render a clear direction to the young generation.  

In conclusion, although educators are the main source of delivering lessons, and comprehending the needs of their students better, to maintain consistency and fairness in the education, the onus of defining the formal syllabus should remain with central organisations.

Some people say that cities are a better place for children to grow up in, while others believe the countryside is the right choice. Discuss both views; give your own opinion and examples.

Some people say that cities are a better place for children to grow up in, while others believe the countryside is the right choice. Discuss both views; give your own opinion and examples.

A few experts believe that urban locales are the best for upbringing young ones, while others opine that rural areas are better options for this task. I believe both have their own significance, and this essay will delve deeper into both opinions. 

To begin with, there are umpteen reasons for several families selecting metropolitans for rearing their wards:  the latter are exposed to better education facilities, the most crucial part of the growing up process. There are numerous options for schools, colleges and universities that afford ample courses to select from  according to individual leanings and anticipated future goals, unlike in the rural area where there are limited educational institutions. Not only this, one can find better academic support framework to bolster the abilities of youngsters such as libraries, private tuitions and museums, to name a few.  

Above all, one cannot forget that by virtue of being predisposed to people from diverse backgrounds, young individuals can garner a better and broader world view, and learn about interaction with others. Most urban youngsters enjoy an invincible lead of their rural counterparts when it comes to communicating with other ethnicities, something considered quite critical in the globalized world.   

However,  growing up in the country also has numerous advantages like young ones can learn to be more empathic, and foster a  strong   sense of community since they live in areas that have small populations, and  everyone is familiar with each other, which lets youngsters foster a sense of cohesion and also cooperation. Moreover, villages offer healthy surroundings; they have fresh and clear air. 

To conclude, even though both aspects have their own benefits, I personally believe that urban settings offer opportunities galore for better education and polishing interactive skills: two pivotal factors driving success in the modern world. 

 

Some people believe that watching TV is bad for children, while others claim it has positive effects for children as they grow up. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people believe that watching TV is bad for children, while others claim it has positive effects for children as they grow up. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

The great public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with a view that watching television could have a negative influence on young minds, while others believe that this could be beneficial. It is, however, quite prudent to encourage engagement with this medium, but there should be some limits. 

A lobby propounds that juveniles become vulnerable to umpteen ailments due to such engagement: eye fatigue, back pain and so on, by virtue of looking at the screens, irreversibly affecting their physical wellness, and precipitate serious and enduring repercussions that extend well into adulthood. To corroborate, in Japan, many youngsters report suffering from incessant back pain due to poor posture while watching TV. Moreover, this electronic device is addictive, forcing one to stay glued to the content being broadcasted prolonging engagement; consequently, making them unproductive and hampering their cognitive development. 

Nevertheless, a group strongly asserts that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Watching television could have positive effects on tender minds since  it could act as a medium to vent out their stress, help them relax and rejuvenate by earning a  break from their mundane overburdened school work. This aids in holistic development of minds where both work and recreation can be balanced, especially in times when outdoor endeavors are increasingly becoming rare for young ones. 

Furthermore, the TV programs can bolster knowledge of youngsters. There are several channels showcasing informative topics, which could aid in broadening horizons: documentaries, news, quizzes, and many more. For example, a recent survey revealed umpteen young individuals watch The Discovery channel to expand their knowledge, enhancing their general awareness about a plethora of topics. 

In conclusion, considering the aforementioned views, I believe that excess of everything is bad, the same goes for the television too. As this invention could cause addiction and diseases, and hence it should be used within limits.

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think the government should pay for this. Others, however, think that drivers should cover the costs. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think the government should pay for this. Others, however, think that drivers should cover the costs. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

A few individuals argue that regimes should bear the cost of maintaining and expanding road networks, while others feel that this expenditure needs to be borne by motorists. This essay will elucidate both the viewpoints and draw a well-reasoned conclusion.

To begin with, people who feel that motorists are the one who should be bearing all the expenses for road maintenance, profess that those using their own vehicles are the primary users of roads and are in minority, so why should others pay for facilitating them. Across the world, only twenty five percent of the population travels by their own means, and cause traffic snarls, precipitating inconvenience to others. Thus, these  individuals should  don the mantle of bearing this expenditure.   

Similarly, when they bear this cost, they will act more responsibly towards public networks and embrace rules and regulations more diligently.  Moreover, this system will reduce the number of vehicles used in the cities since many will be dissuaded from bearing extra cost of operating their own conveyance. Consequently, this will lead to reduction in pollution and traffic congestion on roads.

Nonetheless,  the other school of thought feels that it is fair to say that authorities should be bearing this cost since drivers are already paying extremely large amounts of taxes like carbon tax, road tax, toll tax and fuel tax. to name a few, and bearing this additional levy will over burden them. This lobby suggests that money raised through various charges  should be used to sustain and expand motorways.  

To conclude, even though both have equal responsibilities towards this endeavor, I personally believe that, regime needs to bear this cost since car owners always pay several taxes and charging them more will be unfair. 

Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems, as well as practical problems. Do you agree or disagree?

Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems, as well as practical problems. Do you agree or disagree?

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 with surroundings 
• 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   

It is often perceived by many that people face severe hurdles as immigrants to a country, due to lack of linguistic compatibility, but the other lobby dissents with this notion. I will analyze this matter profoundly,  and share a plausible conclusion.

Many seek better opportunities in an alien environment, but stumble across myriad challenges; they find it hard to adjust themselves in the surroundings such as, neighborhoods, universities and employment, to name a few, as the local community avoids favoring them since lack of knowledge of local tongue fuels distrust. To exemplify, a survey conducted by an eminent professor Dr. John, in New Zealand, states that native students enrolling in universities receive more benefits in academic and professional domains, whereas the foreigners are overlooked. 

On top of that, individuals in their early days encounter impediments while locating, and finding directions to fulfill their basic needs: for example, grocery stores, bus and train stations, and so on.  Likewise, it is seen in many areas that new entrants hesitate to ask for help and directions, making things complicated. 

However, the former view holds little substance today; the advancement in technology is making the life of the immigrants convenient. In contemporary times, there are umpteen applications that allow users to operate while they are in a new country. For instance, they can now get the directions on GPS and travel to any area; get groceries at doorstep just by using doordash, or uber without visiting stores; book cabs for pickups; and use language translator to understand directions, and what others say effortlessly, among others.  

In hindsight, I vehemently opine that using gadgets and modern tools can help surmount the challenges in foreign societies due to lack of knowledge of native tongue. Therefore, this view cannot be upheld  

The leaders of most organizations tend to be older people. However, some argue that younger people make better bosses. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The leaders of most organizations tend to be older people. However, some argue that younger people make better bosses. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 It  is often seen that many managerial positions in the workplace are held by old people, whereas the other lobby suggests that youngsters should populate such designations. The following essay will delve deeper into this matter in the following paragraphs, and share a plausible conclusion.

There are myriad benefits of  having a young manager: most have just cleared their academics, gained knowledge with up-to-date scientifically proven leadership techniques, and are willing to use modern resourceful methods, bringing in a fresh approach to management. To exemplify, a study by an eminent  professor of New York, Dr. Bran states that the companies that place the young professionals on top ranked posts enjoy better prospects due to radical business policies being implemented by these management experts; they apply  innovation, work hard, and are aware of  the contemporary market requirements. 

Similarly, these managers tend to act inclusively and persuade participation of every personnel since they themselves deploy their efforts in every endeavor and lead from the front, instead of sitting back and passing orders, compelling every worker to emulate. They are often cited as being friendly and approachable by their subordinates, which the latter feel comfortable about discussing their queries, and seek resolutions.   

However, the other lobby professes that inexperienced supervisors cannot effectively deliver in leadership roles, this is the domain of those holding profound experience in effectively dealing with unexpected chaos and hurdles that comes with age. For instance, a survey conducted by a corporate magazine proves this view: entities being led by managers of old age are more prone to surmounting issues quickly, by virtue of carrying extensive seasoning.  

In hindsight, I disagree with this arrangement to have the young individuals for management positions as they lack experience and attitude required for the productive output.

In some areas of the US, a ‘curfew’ is imposed, in which teenagers are not allowed to be out of doors after a particular time at night unless they are accompanied by an adult. What is your opinion about this?

In some areas of the US, a ‘curfew’ is imposed, in which teenagers are not allowed to be out of doors after a particular time at night unless they are accompanied by an adult. What is your opinion about this?

Unaccompanied after dark outdoor endeavors of teens have been proscribed in the United States citing the vulnerabilities facing this section of demography, but it fails to convince me since this one size fits all policy will do more harm than good by impeding the privilege of free movement.

A lobby assumes that since the crime against juveniles is soaring, such restrictions are mandatory to protect teens from evil doers: mugging, assault and so on, for they are easy targets  for deviant elements. Moreover, such limitations also encourage the young minds to focus on their studies by staying at home and devoting time to broaden their horizons and career prospects: most of them  are  in high school, a crucial juncture that could define their future as adults. For example, in California, since adolescents are under the curfew during night, they utilize this time to study, aiding them in enhancing their academic performance. 

However, a group asserts that the government is encroaching the right to movement for individuals through such curbs. One cannot limit the movement of teens since it is their birthright to act freely in a democratic country whether with, or without adults. Furthermore, many are engaged in part-time jobs, especially in evenings, in order to repay their educational loans. Such an arrangement will incapacitate many from paying off their debts. To corroborate, a recent survey revealed that university pupils work at night to allow them to repay their study loans, and  this system could deprive them of such opportunities.

In conclusion, unlawful activities will be committed even if teenagers are accompanied by adults, making it imperative to lift the embargo immediately, and it should not be forced in other cities, or nations - except in locales prone to crime after dark - in the future since many students settle their debts by engaging in nightshifts.

It is better to buy just a few expensive clothes, rather than lots of cheaper clothes. Do you agree or disagree?

It is better to buy just a few expensive clothes, rather than lots of cheaper clothes. Do you agree or disagree?

A general perception is emerging that purchasing minimum premium clothing instead of a plethora of low-priced alternatives. Although I believe both sides hold substance, I tend to favour the high-valued clothes.

Some assert that exorbitantly priced attires are of finest quality, are long-lasting owing to the workmanship invested into these, eliminating the need for recurring shopping. Moreover, by donning such ensembles, one can achieve opulence and be influential among peers, and hence, leaving an impression where just with a few pieces can make them look and feel elite. For example, when asked during an interview on national television, many showed support for the attire costing several arms and several legs since this impacted their social persona favorably. 

Similarly, this practice is often compared to sustainable practices. This is to say, everyday piles and piles of dirt cheap clothes are being dumped in landfills, causing serious damage to the environment: soil degradation; they are non-recycleable items. To corroborate, in Japan, over the last decade, there has been an enhancement in the quality of soil since many have curtailed the usage of cheap outfits and supported costly wear.

Furthermore, manufacturing a large amount of clothes puts pressure on the resources and burns a colossal amount of fossil fuel: clothing is only material that cannot be recycled but is vulnerable to redundancy owing to changing vogues. Nonetheless, If people buy a handful of couture and avoid unnecessary shopping for a multitude of cheap clothes; consequently, alleviating the usage of natural resources, which are limited and precious. 

Nevertheless, a group hypotheses that clothing acts as a medium to express creativity, especially among youngsters, who have limited money but want to be fashionable: following such a  propensity would engender inequality, and put many at a disadvantage. Also, some tend to purchase a variety of discounted clothes, for everyday use and avoid repeating the previous outfit. However, this can be countered by convincing them about getting one quality attire for the sake of the planet. 

In conclusion, disputes aside, buying limited costly outfits is a sensible approach since they are long-lasting, helps one attain an impressive social facade, and also aids the environment.

Most pollution, especially air and water pollution, is caused by industry. If we want to protect the environment, we should make factories and other forms of industry pay of all the pollution that they cause. That is the only way to make sure that the owners will make a serious effort to reduce the pollution that they cause. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Most pollution, especially air and water pollution, is caused by industry. If we want to protect the environment, we should make factories and other forms of industry pay of all the pollution that they cause. That is the only way to make sure that the owners will make a serious effort to reduce the pollution that they cause. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Although some believe that taxing manufacturing units alone can act as a reliable medium of coaxing them to switch to greener technologies, this is highly questionable: it is prone to failure. I believe there are more potent tools of convincing manufacturers to act.   

Those advocating environmental tariffs found their argument on the assumption that this move would make the produce expensive, and thus uncompetitive, forcing organizations to spring into action and embrace eco-friendly methods. However, these enthusiastic lobbyists conveniently disregard  an infallible fact that the pollution is not the outcome of an isolated exception, but the industry as a whole, and every manufacturer will espouse evasive strategies. They will compromise with the quality and quantity, and shift the extra burden to the end users, turning the policy ineffective. 

Nevertheless, the need of the hour is to find remedies that can produce tangible outcomes rather than just doing lip service. It is essential to engage businesses by making them partners in the endeavors aimed at ensuring a sustainable environment, and this goal can be achieved if they are made stakeholders in research projects that target discovery of environmentally-friendly fuels, manufacturing techniques, and waste disposal policies.

Similarly, affording monetary stimulus, in the form of tax holidays and rebates, subsidies and support funding, can do wonders in convincing companies to take ownership, and make efforts to phase out old unsustainable and unviable technologies and equipment, and replace them with environmentally-sound procedures and processes. This system has been welcomed by industrialists in countries like China and Germany, for it is a persuasive rather than a punitive measure.

In hindsight, taxation is likely to encourage the industry to resort to unfair means, but partnering with them, besides extending financial inducements, will provoke honest and devoted efforts for environmental protection.  

These days the personal information of many individuals is held by large internet companies and organisations. Do you think the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

These days the personal information of many individuals is held by large internet companies and organisations. Do you think the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Does retention of details of users by internet service providers and large organizations carry more benefits or drawbacks, is a matter that evokes mixed responses. However, I uphold the  view that this policy is more rewarding, provided appropriate safeguards are embraced to ensure user safety. 

This procedure can save immense time, otherwise wasted in sharing details again. Most portals require one to provide details: name and the date of birth, to name a few, and once the information is submitted, it is saved in the permanent database, helping save humongous time and energy, and allowing one to proceed ahead and complete their task quickly, especially while seeking healthcare services or interacting with government schemes. 

Moreover, this system allows governments to create and maintain the profiles of their citizens, and regulate and monitor, or extend them relief when required. To exemplify, authorities in various countries in the western hemisphere follow this practice and afford monetary and healthcare assistance to the inhabitants, particularly the elderly, whenever and wherever required. 

Nonetheless, this system has an inherent detriment: privacy concerns. The personal information becomes vulnerable to unsolicited access, and users might become victims of cybercrime and scams. There has been a spike in incidence of frauds, wherein cyber criminals steal profiles and money, leaving victims helpless. To corroborate, in India, a significant number of online scams are registered every year due to personal data leaks, especially in the case of financial transactions carried out using payment apps. 

To encapsulate, the pros of the policy of private data retention are numerous: it can prove to be time and effort efficient, and exceed the complications. However, the justified concerns about probable online frauds, like getting unwanted messages and calls should be addressed by concerned establishments, to ensure enhancing the browsing experience. 

 

In some countries, more and more people are hiring a personal fitness trainer, rather than playing sports or doing exercise classes. What are the reasons for this? Is this a positive or a negative development?

In some countries, more and more people are hiring a personal fitness trainer, rather than playing sports or doing exercise classes. What are the reasons for this? Is this a positive or a negative development?

Nowadays, many are employing personal wellness coaches instead of participating in sports or workout sessions. The reason seems to stem from a plethora of factors, which shall be discussed in the following paragraphs, and a conclusion will be drawn whether this phenomenon is beneficial or not.

To start with, an army of people asserts that individual trainers render services at home, making them a popular choice. One can workout at the comfort of their homes, eliminating the tedious task of traveling from home to sports centers. Moreover, these professionals also render personalized diet plans according to typical needs and preferences, aiding in holistic progress, where the diet and exercise are synchronized for the betterment of the trainee. Additionally, they act as guides owing to extensive seasoning and profound knowledge, helping in avoiding serious injuries during physical workout. 

Having said that, this trend is surely detrimental. Governments have heavily invested in public gyms for the betterment of the society. If people start hiring such services, such arrangements will be in vain as no one will use these facilities and authorities will have to face loss. Furthermore, if less and less people participate in group sessions,  working out and engaging in sporting disciplines will lose their charm, for humans are gregarious creatures and prosper in the presence of other participants and team mates: this inspires them to go further, and with this emerging system, upcoming generations, might be less inclined towards these activities and making the sports a talk of the past. 

In conclusion, the reasons for this prevailing phenomenon are comfortable at-home workouts, customized food plans, and guidance from the coach to eliminate workout injuries. This evolution is unfavorable since law makers have already made arrangements for the public: gyms and in the future, and sports might lose their popularity.

In schools and universities, some girls tend to choose arts subjects, while boys choose to study science subjects. What are the reasons? Do you think this trend should be changed?

 

In schools and universities, some girls tend to choose arts subjects, while boys choose to study science subjects. What are the reasons? Do you think this trend should be changed?

Nowadays, the gender preference while choosing streams at high school is witnessing wide variance, with females predominantly opting for humanities, and males electing STEM. There are several attributes driving this propensity, and needs a critical analysis to decide whether there is a need to alter this tendency. 

A lobby propounds that girls have a creative mindset, engendering a natural inclination toward arts. They profess profound knowledge of expressing through multiple out of the box mediums: paintings, sculpture, and so on. However, boys have critical thinking and analytical perspectives, some essential traits for becoming doctors and engineers, and hence they select science as their future career. Similarly, a few conservative hypothesize that since boys become breadwinners of the house, they should pick STEM subjects, which will fetch them handsome salaries, whereas arts tend to provide a medium to allow easy earning.

Nevertheless, this perception is quite prejudiced and should be changed immediately. Choosing the subjects should not be based on the genders rather on the misconceived concept of innate proclivity towards a field, ability and passion: there is no evidence to substantiate this. When students pursue areas they genuinely enjoy, they are more motivated, productive, and innovative. Encouraging transcending these orthodox barriers will not only promote equality but also help society progress as both men and women bring different perspectives to every realm. For example, as several human behaviorists, such as Professor Gurdeep Singh Bhatia, University of York, assert that leaning towards a domain is more personality-based  rather than gender-based, and recent surge in participation of males in arts and females in technology, substantiate their claim. 

In conclusion, I believe that both genders can choose any subject that they find appealing, and without being stereotyped and challenge the conventional system, ensuring that every student is free to follow their passion without being confined by gender expectations. 

Nowadays most information is available online, whereas in the past knowledge used to be stored in books and on paper. Do you think the advantages of this situation outweigh its disadvantages?

Nowadays most information is available online, whereas in the past knowledge used to be stored in books and on paper. Do you think the advantages of this situation outweigh its disadvantages?

In this modern era, there is a greater reliance  on virtual means to gather and retain information, while in the past, printed materials used to serve this purpose. This essay shall discuss merits and demerits of this shift and assess whether the former outstrips the latter.  

It is evident that the information available online is  easily accessible and one can retrieve it in any part of the world with reliable resources: mobile, laptops and so forth. To corroborate, if one likes a Shakespeare novel, they do not need to carry printed material anymore; they can view and read the needed content on their phones while journeying  to work, and so forth, without needing to carry a burden along. Moreover, those traveling can forgo paper maps; they have a modern version of GPS-driven maps installed in their phones which can help them during their journey. 

However, it is also true that the information stored in printed form is the most reliable source, and hard to replace; data available on websites can be hacked and manipulated. Similarly, the virtual medium heavily relies on electricity, network and tech literacy, and if one does not have these at their disposal, they cannot store, recover and peruse material. For instance, one could fetch details from online resources only when their devices have enough power to function, besides having network availability, otherwise it is impossible to get information, whereas this is not the case with books. Nevertheless, these complications can be surmounted through prudent steps. 

In hindsight, there is little iota of doubt that the technology has helped eliminate human drudgery by allowing one to save, retain and retrieve data conveniently, and despite posing some limitations, this state-of-the-art facility can prove to be sustainable. Thus, its advantages overweigh its disadvantages.

Animals are at risk of extinction. Some people believe that we should only protect those species that are useful to us. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Animals are at risk of extinction. Some people believe that we should only protect those species that are useful to us. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some contemporary theorists are aligned with a view that since several animals are on the verge of disappearing, efforts and  resources must be invested into saving only the  economically viable. I fail to subscribe to this proposal in absolute terms, for this will prove to be a recipe for disaster.  

To start with, a lobby proposes just focussing on a few species, the governments can save money. This is to say, this will allow more monetary resources for investments into domains that can benefit humans. To corroborate, the money can be utilised in critical sectors: education, healthcare and many more, for the betterment and upliftment of the society. 

However, some strongly resist this and assert that this practice is biased and unethical. Every animal is imperative for ecological balance, and needs unconditional protection, and disrupting this delicate balance  will expose humanity to catastrophic outcomes:  turning the environment into inhospitable. For example, China witnessed a man-made famine during the 1960s, where the crops were ravished by insects. The contemporary regime ordered elimination of sparrows - the  natural predator of local pests - thinking these were enemies of farmers, galvanizing a  stupendous increment in the pest population. 

Moreover, the threat facing animals has been engendered by human activities: poaching, and hunting. Thus, if only selected animals are afforded safeguards, the rest will become vulnerable to such cruel acts - and cause an imbalance in the food chain - in the future since it is human nature to exploit the unprotected. 

In conclusion, disputes aside, one cannot be half pregnant, and only safeguarding animals essential for mankind will jeopardize  the balance of nature, and eventually predispose humans to dire consequences. Moreover, selfishness has led to such circumstances, and panacea lies in conserving every living being for the larger good of the planet. 

People believe 'vertical cities' are the best to live and work in while others believe ' horizontal' cities are better. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

People believe 'vertical cities' are the best to live and work in while others believe ' horizontal' cities are better. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 

The great public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with a dilemma whether it is beneficial to live and work in urban areas with vertical orientation, or one with horizontal silhouette. This essay will discuss both sides and share a plausible opinion.

To start with, a lobby propounds that the metropolitan areas dominated by skyscrapers afford unprecedented convenience to their dwellers. One can find markets, schools and offices at a stone’s throw distance, eliminating the cumbersome task of everyday commuting. For example, in Japan, many choose to live in surroundings that have high rise edifices since every imaginable facility is available in close proximity, alleviating distance and unnecessary travelling. Moreover, the houses are built on the small geographical footprint for accommodating a large populace, mitigating real estate prices and rents, besides creating room for greener buffers and surroundings as lesser space is brought  under  the occupation of concrete.

Having said that, an army of people asserts that urban locales having a flatter skyline lets dwellers enjoy nature and its benefits to the fullest.  This is to say, one can get a clear view of skies, often a luxury in the street canyons created by tall buildings around, enjoy free flowing breeze, and soak in sunlight loaded with Vitamin D: an essential ingredient for strong bones, and lead a healthier life. Additionally, such settings make evacuation uncomplicated during times of crises: flood, earthquake and so forth, ensuring that loss of life and material is minimized. 

To conclude, considering the aforementioned views, I believe life in both kinds of urban settings offers distinct benefits, where one has shorter distances and effortless accessibility to services, the other promises relaxing views and surroundings, and can be chosen as per convenience and preferences.  

Some people think parents should read or tell stories to their children, others say it is not important and can be replaced by watching TV and movies instead. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people think parents should read or tell stories to their children, others say it is not important and can be replaced by watching TV and movies instead. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

The debate over whether one should narrate tales to their wards, or whether this practice can be effectively replaced by TV and movies, has been ongoing. Both perspectives have justified points, and the choice often depends on individual family circumstances and beliefs.

Many believe that mothers and fathers should indulge in the age-old ritual of delivering legends and fables to their little one because of the deep emotional and cognitive benefits it offers. This fosters a strong bond between the two generations, as it promotes active engagement, interaction, and sharing of emotions. Similarly, this does not only improve the vocabulary and linguistic skills of tender minds but also develop their imagination; they tend to listen to their parents more attentively and also ask questions sometimes. Many admit that this has helped their young ones to learn to comprehend and use language more effectively since such narrations take place in a completely informal environment that sans inhibitions.  

Nevertheless, some argue that programs presented on tv and movies serve as modern replacements for bedtime stories. In the fast-paced world of today, where people have limited time, these digital media offer convenience by acting as a potent replacement. These mediums often present graphic and audio content, which are more engaging for young minds. Additionally, educational programs telecasted can teach various life lessons, enhance cultural understanding, and introduce global perspectives. For example, shows like Sesame Street have been known to teach little ones numbers, letters, and rhymes in a more enjoyable way.

In conclusion, although modern means of entertainment  can be beneficial in certain contexts, I believe storytelling is irreplaceable: it fosters emotional connection, and trust. Thus, one should ideally balance both methods, using screen-based entertainment in moderation while prioritizing conventional methods of disseminating tales whenever possible.

Many people think young people should follow traditions. Others argue that young people should be free to be individuals. Discuss both views

Many people think young people should follow traditions. Others argue that young people should be free to be individuals. Discuss both views

Some argue that the young generation should be connected to their native ways of life, while others reject it by contending that it is an individual prerogative. I will discuss both the views in upcoming paragraphs and share a plausible conclusion.

Undoubtedly,  complying with customs endemic to a community can help the youth to stay attached with their roots, and comprehend the rationale and scientific reasoning behind the rituals. For example,  in India, the custom of applying vermilion is very popular and has been followed since ages, for it is considered that applying it on the partition of the hair keeps away the bacterial infection, also reconfirmed by modern married women who admit that they rarely faced any scalp issues. Similarly, applying turmeric and Sandalwood powder on the forehead has its own religious benefits and scientific significance as it helps in fostering creativity, affording mental clarity, and calming the nerves.  Moreover, this will help young individuals enlighten upcoming generations about culture, rituals and moral values by partaking in festivals, special occasions, and so on. 

Nevertheless, the liberals assert that the young should never be forced to follow rituals, and it should be left to their own device. If they are bound to follow it, chances are higher that they might not be able to adapt to the fast changing world, resulting in limited personal growth, reduced creativity, and a lack of broader critical thinking skills necessary for surmounting modern challenges. Moreover, this liberty can  allow them to question the old-fashioned narratives and bring positive change in society by removing obsolete orthodox beliefs.

Overall, I think customs have their own value, but it should not be forced or imposed on the young people. A balanced approach will be the best where they should be made aware about the values of beliefs, but are also given room to explore and redesign them as per modern times.

Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others, however, think that change is always a good thing. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others, however, think that change is always a good thing. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Many prefer to conduct their lives and themselves consistently without deviations, while some seek alterations in their routines believing it fetches fruitful outcomes. This essay critically analyses both the views and serves justified conclusions. 

Undeniably, it is commonly seen that those who find their interest, or desired profession, at a very young age, circumvent switching. To corroborate, if an individual finds a well paid job with chances of growth, they plan on holding onto the same occupation, remain there for years. Moreover, they find themselves in a comfort zone and wish not to step out, fearing  losing everything, once they deviate from the course. This propensity is generally observed among the aging  individuals who dread venturing out in new directions: they feel it might expose them to failure. 

However, those keen to experience a new environment, prefer embracing different approaches, to create room for freshness: continuing in the same regimen for long is quite monotonous that can hamper their creativity. For instance, several musicians try fusing different genres of music in order to discover new sounds, and admit that this satisfies their craving for discovering new ways to produce music.  

Likewise, some, especially the  young and those freshly graduating university, explore new directions to enable enhancements in their professional domains. For instance, many venture into different streams: administration, skilled-jobs, driving, and so forth - until they gain competence - and switch  jobs to find better roles,  bringing rich yields, in the form of better professional, financial and social profiles.  

In hindsight, undeniably, everyone enjoys jurisdiction over the decision to lead the life their way. While some are conservative, others act dynamically and seek new horizons to enrich their lives, and afford themselves innovative ways to better their circumstances and surroundings, and I align myself with this view.  

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

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

Dramatically-incrementing temperatures pose a significant threat to humanity, especially in the current century, as it contributes to rising sea levels, extreme weather patterns and ecological imbalance. This has precipitated major concerns for coastal communities and nations around the world. I would like to discuss problems associated with this phenomenon and propose remedies. 

One of the most concerning complications of this phenomenon: the rising sea levels presented is the displacement of millions of habitats in low lying coastal areas. These  regions are increasingly at risk of flooding, leading to loss of homes, infrastructure and livelihoods. Countries like Bangladesh and islands, such as Maldives, are particularly vulnerable to this threat. In the long run, this could lead to mass migrations, creating a humanitarian crisis as people will seek refuge in safer areas. In addition,this has also precipitated distortion in weather patterns such as typhoons and storm surges. These events can cause widespread damage to cities and agricultural lands, threatening food security and economic stability in many regions. 

However, there are several potential antidotes to these menacing circumstances: alleviating greenhouse gas emissions, the primary driver of global warming, holds the key. Renewable  energy sources such as solar wind, and hydropower, should be prioritized and quickly supersede fossil fuels. Moreover, investing in more reliant infrastructure to withstand flooding tides can help. Coastal cities can build seawalls, levees and other protective structures to prevent flooding. Additionally, sustainable urban planning strategies should be adopted such as, restricting construction in flood prone areas, and implementing green infrastructure like parks and wetlands to absorb excess water.

In conclusion, the increasing influence of greenhouse effects presents serious challenges, from displacing populations to impacting economies. Thus, a combination of steps like emission reduction and sustainable development should be embraced to mitigate these impacts. 

Some believe that tackling environmental issues should be managed by a global organization instead of being handled individually by national governments. Do you agree or disagree with this belief?

Some believe that tackling environmental issues should be managed by a global organization instead of being handled individually by national governments.

Do you agree or disagree with this belief?

Why a universal approach?

• Environmental problems transcend political and geographical borders, and must be responded jointly 

• There is uneven distribution of resources, which could create an imbalance in implementation, but an international body can effectively bridge this void 

• A global approach can help resolve differences between different nations and engender cooperation 

Why locally? 

• National governments are better informed about the complications affecting local populations

• Decision making fast 

• There is a lack of trust between the the prosperous and destitute nations, the latter fear that the former may try to impede their development in the name of development     

The fast deteriorating health of the planet has drawn a profound interest in finding ways to alleviate this threat, and a majority believes that a task of such multitude requires international action. I subscribe to this notion because such a critical job cannot be negotiated effectively at the regional level.

Undeniably,  pollution transcends geographical and political boundaries and has a domino effect on other areas miles away, sometimes continents apart, from the source. This is likely to impact all forms of life far and wide, and jeopardize people, flora, and fauna. To corroborate, the arctic is getting contaminated by the residue of industrial effluents released from thousands of miles away in Egypt, India, and China, among others, killing the plankton, a food source of myriads species of fish. Such complications must be handled jointly by all countries if any tangible outcomes are to be achieved.

Similarly, individual undertakings aimed at resolving the environmental imbroglio will certainly  be hampered by uneven distribution of resources and expertise while elite societies have these at their disposal, the impoverished lack these. However, global cooperation can help make available essential elements and ingredients to enable discovery and deployment of mitigation tools and strategies. 

Nevertheless, although the skeptic lobby does raise its concerns regarding the developed nations overwhelming their underdeveloped counterparts to push their agenda of gaining control over the latter, these fears are unfounded and lack substance; the consequences of inhospitable environment will affect everyone in equal measure, and will be more pronounced in destitute countries owing to absence of mechanism to offset the environmental impact.

In hindsight, taking steps to avert ecological catastrophe should be the onus of a multilateral world body as only it can engender policies to enable concerted efforts from every part of the globe.