Weddings are getting bigger and more expensive. What is the reason for this? Is it a positive or negative development?

 WEDDINGS ARE GETTING BIGGER AND MORE EXPENSIVE. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS?

IS IT A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE DEVELOPMENT?

 

 

Nowadays, weddings have become a status symbol, turning them into an extravagant affair. This growing propensity can be attributed to several causes, but it does have favorable and unfavorable effects on people. 

The primary motivation promoting this extravagance lies in many considering marriages to be a once in a lifetime event. Umpteen numbers, especially parents consider this as an opportunity to celebrate such rare occurrences with all the fanfare, and with the nuclear families becoming ubiquitous, the number of children per family have shrunk, turning tying nuptials into a rare occasion. This persuades the populace to go in for lavish marriage events. As per them, this helps create memorable moments that will become a part of nostalgia later, something to be relished by all in the family alike.    

Nevertheless, this evolution is surely not something one can term as laden with benefits. It has been observed that people tend to spend their entire savings, or even take loans for making weddings more lavish. This can have a long lasting impact on their future as many times it becomes an uphill task to repay the debt, leading families into a vicious cycle of financial crisis.

To corroborate, this can be supported by citing the outcomes of studies carried out by eminent social theorists from across the world that have revealed that a major cause of bad credit standings owes to lendings for marriages that are hard to repay back. Many have been found sacrificing their other essential necessities to surmount the problems stemming from such spending.  

Overall, big fat marriage events do look an attractive idea, but the aftermath of undertaking such endeavors can cause an undue stress of financial credentials and eventually affect the quality of life. Thus, I feel it is an unfavorable trend.   

Educating young people is naturally important. However, some think governments ought to invest more in education for adults in need. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Educating young people is naturally important. However, some think governments ought to invest more in education for adults in need. 

To what extent do you agree or disagree? 

 

Education plays a major role in society for all age groups, but of late, some have been proposing prioritizing educating disadvantaged grown-ups rather than youngsters. This statement can, however, be challenged on various grounds.  

It is important to invest into spreading illiteracy among adults. This could help them to attain their diverse objectives, and assist them in improving their earnings. It has been observed that a colossal ratio of the adult population, especially in poor countries, is either lacking education or does not possess skills that can fetch their money to make their ends meet, forcing them to survive in extremely poor conditions. This can have a long lasting impact on society as poor economic conditions could push these people to either depend on government support, raising public expenditure astronomically, or compel their young ones to engage in child labor. Thus, laying emphasis on providing them with education would aid them in getting their children and also contributing to the economy of the country. 

Having said that, there is skepticism about this proposal. It is believed that even though educating adults is important, juvenile education cannot be demoted to a lower pedestal. Youngsters are the future of society and preparing them to be literate holds paramount importance: it will create a future potential for effective participation in economic activities in various strategic economic sectors, and also create room for innovation, besides facilitating capability to face and surmount challenges arising in the future.

In hindsight, I fail to  concur completely with this suggestion since, although it is necessary to spread literacy among the adult citizens, educating children cannot take a back seat; it will surely hamper the future prospects of progress. Thus, equal priorities to both categories should be allotted.

Most people spend major part of adult life at the work, in which case job satisfaction is an important element of individual well being. What factors contribute to job satisfaction? How realistic is the expectation of job satisfaction for all workers? Discuss and give your views. Write no at least 250 words.

Most people spend major part of adult life at the work, in which case job satisfaction is an important element of individual well being. What factors contribute to job satisfaction? How realistic is the expectation of job satisfaction for all workers? Discuss and give your views. Write no at least 250 words.

Factors that influence Job Satisfaction

- Monetary Benefits: let people participate in family with more money

- Non-monetary inducements: Fuels a sense of belongingness

Unrealistic approach as alleged

- Any new additions tend to become obsolete very soon, and expectations rise

- Everyone is not moved by similar stimulants, making contentment an elusive element

Nowadays, when a majority of grown-ups tend to spend most of their day at work, it becomes imperative to ensure that they are happy with their employment. These are several factors that contribute to such stage of mind, but it remains to be seen weather this phenomenon holds any relevance, or not. 

The most prominent component that contributes to contentment at work  are monetary benefits. Appropriate salary as per the rank and work, timely and productivity linked incentives, to name a few, are some of the examples of financial inducement  that can make personnel feel happy with their jobs . It is undeniable that one takes up employment for the sake of livelihood, and additional or satisfactory earnings can help them participate in their family with more money. 

Moreover, there are certain elements that also have a greater role in making people satisfied with their work. Stimulation such as work as per skills, qualification, promotions, free health care support and education for their children, free annual trips , a comfortable environment, and so on, can make workers feel belonged to the organization and fetch unparalleled pleasure.  

However, the critics to this notion feel that this concept is no more than a hoax, something that is elusive, since the expectations of humans keep rising with new addition to earning or facilities. The old sops offers became obsolete, and employees back asking for more and more that in turn, fuels discontent. Moreover, everyone is not driven by similar stimulants. For instance for some money is on the top of the list, while for others, acknowledgement and more affiliation are a priority.    

To conclude , despite doubts been raised by certain section about the validity of the term contentment at work. I strongly feel that happiness with work is tangible factor which can affect the productivity of the work force.

Nowadays not many young people choose to work in the farming industry. Why do you think that is? How could young people be encouraged to work in this industry?

 Nowadays not many young people choose to work in the farming industry. Why do you think that is? How could young people be encouraged to work in this industry?

Reasons why the youth is disenchanted from joining agriculture 

• This occupation does not enjoy a good reputation as one engaged in this trade are regarded as unskilled 

• The income is not regular like other trades and is also exposed to various risks 

• No one wants to indulge in an activity that is physically demanding and needs one to spend days and nights guardian crops 

What are the ways to surmount this challenge 

• Governments should classify farming as a skilled activity and educate youngsters about using modern methods that need little physical efforts 

• Extend monthly financial support, in the form of stipend

• Offer insurance against any kind of  loss of crop 

Agriculture today is not as popular among youth as it was in the past. The roots of this problem lie in various causes. However, a little careful and prudent planning can transform the situation. 

The  primary motivation behind youngsters abandoning this field is the lack of respect for those engaged in farming. Traditionally, this trade is regarded as a domain where no skill and specialization are required, and thus, the ones working as farmers are considered to be unskilled, which is deemed as disparaging by the current generation. They do not want to be seen engaging in something that hampers their reputation. To add to that, a little education makes them harbor, and prioritize, professional dreams that guarantee them a regular income as against the irregular one that they earn by growing crops, making the latter unpopular with them. 

To corroborate, a study, conducted by eminent economist and social theorist Dr. Harmeet Singh from Toronto University, revealed that most young ruralites, who had completed their matriculation, wanted to go ahead and obtain technical skills to join manufacturing, or tertiary sector, so that they would be respected by their friends and relatives and also receive a regular salary. 

The situation can be turned around provided the state intervenes and acts pragmatically. Classifying agriculture as a skilled occupation; educating youngsters about applying scientific methods in farming; and extending stipend, or some kind of payout on a monthly basis, are some methods that can help persuade the current generation to till the land again. But, it is only governments that can arrange such facilities. 

Overall, the disenchantment among youth with this occupation is quite justified since they deserve a better deal in the concurrent times. Therefore, the state needs to install policies to make agriculture popular again. 

The Wealth of the UAE has historically come from the Oil Deposits in Abu Dhabi (The Capital of UAE). If Abu Dhabi runs out of Oil, the UAE economy will collapse. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The Wealth of the UAE has historically come from the Oil Deposits in Abu Dhabi (The Capital of UAE). If Abu Dhabi runs out of Oil, the UAE economy will collapse. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

One wonders what would happen if the UAE taps last of its oil – a traditional source of prosperity. Even though some doomsayers predict catastrophic outcomes, the chances seem far less that one would expect. 

The probability of the collapse of the economy of the UAE is remote.  The regime has woken up to the reality of life without crude; thus, they have decided to divert into other profitable venues of capital generation that would lead to a stable economy. Abu Dhabi and Dubai are being promoted as industrial hubs, proving to be a prudent move as major global giants companies have shown their interest and started transferring their operations into this Middle East nation. This has boosted employment as they have started hiring locals, bolstering the job market tremendously. 

Furthermore, tourism is another sector that has grown exponentially and is expected to become a multi-trillion dollars industry over the next two decades. These two domains cumulatively will be able to match the earnings of oil extraction, ruling out the possibility of this economy being shattered once the oil is exhausted. 

However, despite holding little substance, the view of an imminent collapse being propagated is based on certain unproven assumptions that propose that, up to now, whatever has been earned by drilling and selling crude will be lost, by virtue of this country not focusing on any other sector. Other businesses established are simply ancillary to oil industry. Nevertheless, these speculations will hardly prevail once the diversified economy of this Arab country starts to churn out colossal economic performance.      

Overall, after assessing the statement in detail,  I strongly feel that the  economy of the this nation will endure and instead prosper by being driven by other upcoming sectors, and all the forecasts will fall flat.

Many researchers show that overeating can have negative effects and people believe that advertising of certain foods should be banned, in the same way that some countries banned advertising of cigarettes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this.

 

Many researchers show that overeating can have negative effects and people believe that advertising of certain foods should be banned, in the same way that some countries banned advertising of cigarettes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this.

The great public discourse of the contemporary times is aligned with a topical issue whether ads featuring certain edible items be prohibited in a similar manner as those promoting tobacco products, or not, since indulging in an overconsumption is detrimental to health just like smoking. There are views that are in favor and against this notion.

To start with, forbidding advertisements of food seems quite relevant to some health experts. They suggest that humans have a natural tendency to be tempted by scrumptious looking food, and most of the adverts are made in such a way that the dishes presented look mouth-watering and delectable, and fuel a desire in the viewers to buy and consume the promoted products, most of which are junk food and can cause serious health issues if taken in large quantities. The objective of publicity campaigns is generally to raise the sales of the publicized goods, and in the case of food such a goal can be met only if consumers are pushed into having more and more of items being advertised. 

However, the other lobby is not convinced with the former opinion; they suggest that imposing a prohibition on publicity of edible goods is unlikely to help, and thus not required. Over consumption is generally linked to/ associated with the individual habits that push one into eating in moderation, or binge-eating, and advertising has got little role to play in this. Those interested in satisfying their taste buds and their craving for eating like a horse will be able to find their desired food even without commercials. 

Overall, I completely dissent with the statement since  overindulgence with food is not due to advertisements, but because of personal likes and dislikes. Therefore, forbidding food promotions will be an unnecessary step.

Some believe that nuclear weapons benefit the world at large. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Some believe that nuclear weapons benefit the world at large. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 

How are nuclear weapons benefiting the world?  

• The stocks of these weapons have acted as effective deterrents against wars 

• Keeping countries safe from aggression of enemy states 

Why not? 

• Any accidental use could cause havoc  

• If these fall in

  
  
  wrong hands such as terrorists, the humanity will face a serious jeopardy 
  

Atomic weaponry, undoubtedly, has been a remarkable feat of mankind but has also become a highly controversial topic as some praise it for the advantages  it offers, while the others  are wary of its darker side and suggest a vigilance.     

These  weapons have emerged as a formidable tool of deterring full scale wars between enemy states as the possession of such type of armaments dissuades foes from initiating a large-scale altercation - since this might provoke either of the nuclear states to use these weapons, resulting in widespread destruction - and persuades them to resort to bilateral and multilateral negotiations to resolve differences and disputes. 

History has been the witness to this non-aggressive stance of various nations, or  rather alliances they have adopted after the invention of this weapon technology between 1945 and 1949.  Prior to this, the world had been engaged in a perennial tussle to gain control over the resources and land area, and had experienced two great wars within a span of 30 years. However, since the time major global players have armed themselves with atomic ammunition, they have not dared to pursue aggression as a policy.

Nevertheless, it would be too naive to overlook the grave danger the stockpiles  of these instruments pose to every form of life on this planet. An umpteen number of people are seen expressing a fear that accidental detonation could result in millions of casualties as observed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and turn the affected region into an uninhabitable area because of radioactivity. 

Overall,  I completely agree with this statement as this technology has acted as an insurance against the war and has helped evade any major conflicts across the globe post second world war. A little careful policy can assist in overcoming any possible hazards.