Some believe that younger family members should be legally responsible for supporting older family members when they become physically, mentally and financially unable to look after themselves. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Some believe that younger family members should be legally responsible for supporting older family members when they become physically, mentally and financially unable to look after themselves.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, a perception seems to be emerging that young people should be bound by law to take care of their aging family members. However, there are some voices of dissent on this issue.  

To start with, most of the aging members of the family spend their entire life making sure that their younger ones get proper education, eventually affording the latter successful careers. Moreover,  it is seen that the older people spend the most important time of their life saving money for their wards, relinquishing their own dreams, for the sake of the better future of their offspring. Thus, it becomes imperative for them to be reciprocated by their children in the same way, but that is rarely happening so today, making it quite plausible to suggest creating a law that binds the young members to this task. It is only the fear of punishment that will push children to fulfill their moral and ethical duties in the world dominated by consumerism. 

However, others, although quite few in numbers, are up in arms against this proposal, for this section considers such a move as an encroachment of private lives of citizens. The state can only act as a medium of spreading awareness among citizens about their obligations, rather than acting as a tool to guide people about how to deal with their family members. Similarly, as these critics suggest, many households may not be in a condition to support their elderly family members due to poor economic conditions, and making a statute in this regard could exacerbate their conditions and woes.   

Overall, I vehemently support this move: young people should be legally bound to support their aging parents. This seems to be the only way to  coax them into honoring their moral and ethical responsibilities. 

Some people think that criminal behavior can have genetic reasons, while others believe that only circumstances can lead some people to crime. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people think that criminal behavior can have genetic reasons, while others believe that only circumstances can lead some people to crime. Discuss both views and give your opinion.  

Why do some people feel crime may have genetic connection 

·         It has been seen that there are some races that have survived on activities like hunting 

·         There have been people who have hailed from regions that faced extreme scarcity of resources, their ancestors relied on looting the travelers

·         Natural animal instincts  

Why do some people feel crime is driven by circumstances 

·         Poverty and destitution, and  on top of that lack of education is keeping people poor, and hence they go in for unlawful means 

·         Many are swayed by the desire possess everything that consumer society can afford 

·         Lack of proper upbringing 

·         Coercion is a means that cannot be overlooked 

·         Self defence 

Unlawful activities have been a part and parcel of life ever since humans appeared on this planet. This has persuaded many to explore and discover the source of this menace, and different schools of thought have arrived at contrasting conclusions, with some blaming criminal activities to be stemming from conditions and surroundings, while others linking it to inherited practices. 

To embark upon discussion, several criminologists claim that most illegal activities are an outcome of these animal instincts that are deeply encoded in the human genes, and it needs  only a slight provocation for an individual to become aggressive and resort to violent and illegal ways. This innate propensity also pushes people to react aggressively and take laws into their own hands. This has been supported by several studies carried out to determine the motivation behind partaking in an unlawful endeavor, which revealed that most incidents took place due to impulsive action and reactions of people involved. There were also some cases where perpetrators enjoyed inflicting pain on others. 

Nevertheless, there is another lobby that differs from the former perception: they feel that no one is born a criminal and it is the situation that compels them to opt for anti-social behaviour. The prevailing economic disparities and the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots is the primary source of unlawful acts. To worsen/exacerbate the consumerist attitude the setting its foot firmly in, which  is fueling desires and pushing the deprived to choose the shortest possible method to gain those materialistic possessions, through deviant ways.

Overall, after assessing both the viewpoints, I arrive at a conclusion that both opinions are justified since sometimes, criminal activities are the outcome of the inbred attitude, and at others driven by several factors like money.  

 

Light pollution (excessive light during night time) is a form of pollution that distresses many people, especially in modern cities. What are the causes of light pollution, and what solutions can you suggest for governments and businesses to take?

  Light pollution (excessive light during night time) is a form of pollution that distresses many people, especially in modern cities. What are the causes of light pollution, and what solutions can you suggest for governments and businesses to take?

Unnecessary usage of lights at night mostly in developed cities results as a distress for many. The upcoming paragraphs shall discuss the causes and plausible solutions.

To begin with, the pollution caused by lighting has several attributes. The most prominent is the flooding of areas with more than required illumination is the biggest cause of light pollution, resulting in 70 percent of the incidence of such pollution in urbanized locations. Another contributing factor to this menace is  the incorrect designs of the lighting systems that let the light escape skywards instead of only focusing on the required area. 

Moreover, excessive emissions of light from high beams of cars, buses, and other automobiles on city roads, or highways also precipitate this problem. On top of that, billboards of advertisements shining throughout the night are often blamed for this; it is quite easy to come across large illuminated hoardings announcing goods and services dot all the main roads of urban locales. Above all, a new addition to this issue has been the strong light beams from parties and events at night heading towards the sky.

However, there are possible solutions to this issue, reducing the usage of irresponsible use of street lights and headlights can lead to a massive decline in light pollution. Above that, modification in lighting designs can also reduce a great amount of light wastage by directing the beams towards areas required and not in the surroundings, or the sky. Above all, implementation of time restrictions on the use of illuminated advertisement hoardings can also limit the non-required emissions of light.

To summarize, I believe that with limitations on certain imprudent use of illuminating apparatus and a little modification in designs, this  difficulty can be mitigated to a great extent.

The shortage of housing in big cities can cause severe consequences. Only government action can solve this problem. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 The shortage of housing in big cities can cause severe consequences. Only government action can solve this problem.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The shortage of housing in big cities can cause severe consequences.

 

I agree 

• The state has the jurisdiction to bring laws to change the use of land within boundaries of cities. 

• They also enjoy the privilege of taking decisions about expansion of the residential areas to suburbs 

• They have the resources - monetary and logistical - to see such programs through 

I disagree 

• Citizens can also play a part in this; converting their single storeyed houses into multiple floors by taking permissions. 

• They can form forums and form public opinion to force authorities to   spring into action 

• The corporate - builders and other organization - can also take part in this, and develop residential areas. 

 

There is a common perception that only policy makers are having the capability of finding solutions to the crisis caused by paucity(shortage) of residential units in urban locales. This notion, however, is challenged by several quarters.

Undeniably,  governments are vested with the powers to enact laws to afford benefits to citizens. On a similar note, they can create provisions to affect changes in bye-laws governing the land use. For example, in cities like Delhi, when the authorities realized that inhabitants were facing a steep scarcity of residential units, and prices and rents of property were spiraling out of control, they sprang into the action and responded by dismantling old low-rise housing units and converting certain commercial areas with derelict buildings into the residential ones. Such undertakings helped in mitigating the issue upto a certain level.

Similarly, regimes also enjoy the jurisdiction of developing residential areas on the outer fringes and in suburbs that can help ease the burden of population on urban areas. This task requires involvement of multitude of infrastructural development and expertise that can exclusively be arranged by the state. Sub-cities like Gurugram, Dubai, Goyang and Montpellier, to name a few, are some of the successful examples of initiatives taken by the local governing bodies.

Nevertheless, although not supported by a strong rationale, some suggest that this task is not the lone responsibility of politicians, even citizens can play a role by forming forums to foster public opinion and force urban planners to create policies that can aid in arranging more and more accommodations for urbanites.  

To recap, controversies apart, only the state machinery has the competence to provide efficient and bespoke solutions for this monumental challenge as  piecemeal efforts and initiatives are likely to culminate into a chaos. ‘

 

Nowadays many young people deliberately damage public places. What are the causes and solutions?

 

Nowadays many young people deliberately damage public places. What are the causes and solutions?

Cause 

• Lack of counseling about how to vent their anger 
• Lack of education about the relevance of communal properties - youth are completely oblivious of this fact that public places are funded by taxpayers’ money and hold a great importance for society 
• Lack of empathy towards surroundings 
• Lack of accountability 
• An intent to highlight their fearless  attitude 
• Absence of proper measures to counter such acts 

Measures to counter such acts 

• Educating them about the significance of such places and the impact of their actions
• Holding them or their families accountable for such damage and making them bear the expenditure of such damage 
• Punitive measures: penalty and punishment 
• Installing proper security for such location 
•  

In concurrent times, a startling phenomenon seems to be surfacing around where the youngsters  are found defiling public spaces. Many attribute such conduct to lack of education and accountability among them. As per experts, certain judicious steps can help curtail such acts. 

 

The primary reason behind such disruptive behavior among the youth is absence of adequate enlightenment about the relevance of such places, and their obligations as lawful citizens. It has been observed that youngsters are completely oblivious about the role of communal property, why it is there and how it is to be used; and moreover, why it is necessary to protect it from being desecrated. This lack of knowledge also leads to apathy, encourages anti-social acts, and many end up taking such properties for granted, and defiling them for either pleasure,  or vent out their anger.  

 

Additionally, dearth of adequate measures to ensure prevention of such conduct is adding fuel to fire and exacerbating the situation. Across the world, as it has been surveyed, governments are yet come up with ways to surmount such unruly behavior, and vandals have a free run, who go around damaging the property that belongs not only to society but also them cumulatively, at their will fearlessly.  

 

Nevertheless, this menace can be curbed provided families and  schools join hands in informing young ones about their civic obligations towards society - that should mandatorily include teaching about significance of such places. Besides this, the state should resort to punitive methods: penalties and punishments for perpetrators and their families to discourage such endeavors.

 

Overall, although vandalism involving young individuals is a pressing  problem today, it is not unconquerable. Appropriate social education  and prudent steps by authorities can go a long way in overcoming this issue.

 

Many people feel that media coverage has been becoming increasingly biased today. Why is this? What can be done to fix this problem?

Many people feel that media coverage has been becoming increasingly biased today.

 Why is this?

 What can be done to fix this problem?

Reasons for media getting corrupted 

• Craving for fame and fortune, which can only be achieved by favoring affluent and powerful 

• Jumping into the bandwagon and only taking up those issues that are pursued profoundly by a greater proportion of media fraternity 

• A desire for high viewership and readership since media is a big business today 

Methods to overcome 

• Greater monitoring by the state to ensure that media does not cross the limits of fairness 

• Severe penalties should be installed for the offenders - those misreporting or distorting facts 

• People should boycott such media houses

Mediums of mass communication are seen exercising partisanship quite blatantly today. This can be attributed to several causes, but nonetheless media houses can be forced to fall in line by adopting certain prudent steps. 

The  most prominent reason driving this propensity among media professionals is a strong and overwhelming craving for fame and fortune that can only be attained by gaining favors from the affluent and powerful people. To see this through, those engaged in this occupation tend to conceal certain facts and distort others to benefit their rich acquaintances. Moreover, unlike in the past, media is a big business today  and is owned by corporate giants and rich industrialists, making it natural for those associated with such organizations, to comply with the instructions given by their owners to only present the information that can help yield colossal profits, even if one has to keep certain diverse dimensions obscure from the public. 

To corroborate, a study carried out by media mogul  Dr. Harmeet Singh concluded that most media professionals felt helpless and frustrated because of the compulsion of modern times that were reflected in a fight for survival and earning riches, and showing loyalty to their employers, which meant abandoning morality and basic tenets.

Nonetheless, this appalling  trend can be easily countered by prohibiting the entry of business houses; individuals influenced by political, communal, religious and social affiliations; and those who have a strong drive to earn and expand their monetary resources. Additionally, the public should also snub and stop following such agencies, so that these can be forced to behave responsibly.

Overall, the lopsidedness of establishments engaged in mass media is quite evident from their actions and can be considered plausible. Therefore, adopting a zero tolerance attitude to curtail this practice is highly recommended.

As reading is important for good education, we should encourage children to read whatever appeals to them. Do you agree or disagree?

 As reading is important for good education, we should encourage children to read whatever appeals to them. Do you agree or disagree?

Yes? 

- The paramount task is to foster reading habits among youngsters,

selection and guidance can come later. 
- If young individuals are compelled into reading what their parents or
teachers want them to, by virtue of being rebellious, they will
stop reading with interest, turning the whole exercise futile
No 

• • Children are immature and may wander off into the wrong direction, end up reading something that is too mature for them, making them vulnerable to content that may contain violence or porn. 

  • With a humongous amount of information available on every subject today, because of availability of various resources, there is a good chance that young minds may get inundated with information, confusing them: guided reading is suggested.

    

Reading is considered to be a crucial exercise for gaining academic excellence, but should youngsters be afforded liberty to access the material that fascinates them is an intriguing question.

A school of thought professes that the youngsters should be allowed to access the content that they find intriguing: the most paramount task is fostering an inclination among them towards reading, and it can only be done if the little ones are rendered with enough liberty. It has been seen that when children start turning pages of books, magazines and comics to name a few, they develop a close connection with the colorful content that they can associate easily with or at least appreciate. This raises curiosity among them to also read what is printed along; eventually, inculcating a habit to read. 

Having said that, the former suggestion may hold some substance, but in contemporary times, offering such liberty can lead to unwarranted consequences, making it unacceptable. By virtue of these young individuals being naive enough to decide between what is right or wrong for them, there is good chance of them going astray, and in the process, accessing something that is either too complex for their tender minds - far beyond their ability to comprehend the things - that could confuse them, or mature content - freely available on the internet in various manifestations such as one containing violence and indecent behavior - that could distort their personalities. This makes it imperative to monitor what youngsters read today.

In hindsight, it is hard to concur with this suggestion: this practice, especially in the concurrent times, can expose youngsters to unwarranted consequences and also cause problems for mothers and fathers. Inexperienced minds are incapable of deciding what is suitable for them. Hence, extreme caution is recommended.  

Some people say history is one of the most important school subject. Other people think that ,in today's world, subjects like science and technology are more important than history. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

 Some people say history is one of the most important school subject. Other people think that ,in today's world, subjects like science and technology are more important than history. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. 

 

A tug of war has ensued between a diverse section of educationalists to decide which subject holds greater relevance for young learners. While a school of thought professes that history should be priority in the formal tuition, others argue that science and technology holds greater significance.

The lobby backing history strongly puts forward its opinion asserting that studying about the past is of critical importance for the young generation, for this can expose them to how life and civilization evolve on this planet; how ancestors settled in the form of communities;  how they gave rise to fundamental technologies, basic skills and language. This subject can also inform about  changes in the environment and climatic shifts over the eons/age. Cumulatively, this can help the upcoming generation in not only perpetuating the knowledge transfer by the past generations but also find solutions to the current challenges facing the world today. Apart from that this domain can also act as a rich source of wisdom and important lessons for life.

Having said that, those rallying behind the notion of science and technology being more relevant today than history point out that the need of the hour in the current paradigm is to brace oneself up for the future as the advent of modern methods and techniques has necessitated/entailed productive engagement of youngster with concepts of science and technology. This will help them apply sophisticated techniques in diverse realms of life as well as obtain suitable employment, allowing them to earn livelihood and survive comfortably.

In hindsight, after assessing both the views, it can be clearly said that drawing parallels between both the subjects is quite a ludicrous idea as both subjects serve different purposes and target diverse areas of personality. Therefore, both domains are essential for pupils.

Many people believe that physical appearance and clothing of famous personalities is given more importance. What is your opinion?

Many people believe that physical appearance and clothing of famous personalities is given more importance. What is your opinion?

It is a million dollar question when it comes to assessing what is more significant for a key public figure, it is quite effortless to pass the credit to their looks and dressing sense for their fame; however, this certainly is a notion worthy of being challenged. 

It is generally perceived that, despite this view hinging onto a precarious logic, celebrities in various fields - especially those engaged in film, theater, modelling - are able to gross more and more work due to their appearance and their way of dressing up. Their immaculate personality lures paparazzi into pursuing them rigorously, making them talk of the town and then ubiquitous. There have been instances where many public idols have been able to grab offers to work in advertisements and promotions due to their photogenic faces and perfect dressing up. 

Nevertheless, the notion lacks substance, if the things are analyzed closely and deeply. One cannot discount the fact that common individuals obtain bigger than life status through their hard work and unswerving determination: be it in any field, sports, movies, art or even journalism. One, as it is said, touches the pinnacle if they are unperturbed by the challenges they face, and are prepared to brave the hardships.     

Moreover, one rules the fascination of masses because of not their facades of looks and clothes  but due to their interaction with society. Those engaging in a meaningful dialogue and relationship with their surroundings: indulging in altruistic work and something that benefits society, are considered to be more  deserving by people: followers and critics alike.  

Overall, I find this notion quite ludicrous, gaining popularity among masses just by virtue of clothes and appearance is short-lived, what one must consider to remain in the limelight is the never say die spirit and continuous enthusiasm. 

Environmental problems such as pollution and climate change affect all the people in the world. Although global decisions are made to reduce these problems, the solutions are not effective. Why are the solutions ineffective? How can these problems be solved?

Environmental problems such as pollution and climate change affect all the people in the world. Although global decisions are made to reduce these problems, the solutions are not effective. Why are the solutions ineffective? How can these problems be solved? 

 

Undeniably, environmental issues such as global warming are affecting every country adversely. However, even though multiple decisions are made at transnational level, it is not showing much difference.  

 

Multiple reasons can be attributed to impediments presented in implementation of solutions for alleviating/mitigating the problems facing the planet include non-implementation of policies. For example, littering on the land, and in water bodies, has still not been banned and there is still no fine on it in many countries, thereby letting the problems persist. Also, several governments have not yet made it mandatory for car manufacturers to produce vehicles complying  with the latest pollution norms. There is a fear that implementing such a policy might impede growth, by forcing manufacturers out of business by virtue of them not having appropriate resources to implement such conventions.  

 

Similarly, there is gross mistrust among elite and  impoverished nations because the latter allege that such rules are being enforced upon them to present hurdles in the way of their development. To add to the woes, the ever rising population has also forced regimes of various countries, especially the underdeveloped countries, to shift their focus to rendering facilities to their citizens, which makes the reforms take a back seat.     

 

To resolve this imbroglio, the UNO and governments should make rules that should be applicable to all and should be strictly followed. Each country should carry out audits in every city to make sure that rules are being followed strictly.  Additionally, prosperous nations should share technology and expertise with the poor ones to let the global environmental laws be enacted effectively. 

 

Overall, the apathy towards environmental norms is quite conspicuous and driven by mistrust and local priorities. Nevertheless, the global community must take requisite prudent steps  in haste to avert any catastrophe.

Music is appreciated in every major society and culture of the world today. Sone people believe that music is to be shared. Others, however, believe that music belongs to those who make it and should only be shared with their authorisation.

 

Music is appreciated in every major society and culture of the world today. Sone people believe that music is to be shared. Others, however, believe that music belongs to those who make it and should only be shared with their authorization.    

  

Why free access 

• Music is collective property with no one having proprietary rights, and inspires composers
• Allowing free access can fetch visibility to people 

Why not

• This could discourage creators of music 
• Creators enjoy the privilege of decision of to share or not to      

Music, in all its manifestations,  has always fascinated humans, but should it be rendered freely to all, or  should the composers enjoy the right to share it, is a matter deeply debated. 

There is a strong argument in favor of making this form of art available to everyone without  any restriction, which banks upon the fact that music is deeply entwined with the culture and  tradition it represents; thus, no one enjoys  a proprietary claim over it. When even the best of composers draw  inspiration from the  native genres of this art form and churn out melodious notes, why should it not be accessed by all without worrying about permissions to enjoy it. 

Another  perspective that looks at the positive  side of permitting free access to musical compositions. This can help creators gain visibility among the listeners, fetching them not  only work but also aiding in survival in the times when, every  day, new musicians  are surfacing on the horizon. Keeping creations obscure will be of little assistance,  and  will be forgotten by those,  who pay to listen because of fresh work being made public every day.    

Nevertheless, the critical opinion on this issue favors the practice of creators reserving the privilege of rendering free public access to their work. They have every right to enjoy the exploits of the investment  of their creativity and efforts,  in terms of monetary gains, and no one should object to this since musical  notes are  just another form of artistic work, like paintings and  sculpture, which sell for money.     

Overall, it may seem to some that discretion of sharing music should rest on the creators, I, nonetheless, feel that this art form should be allowed a free access by all: it will bring rich yields for producers.  

It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaurs, dodos, etc.). There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening.

 It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaurs, dodos, etc.). There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening.

Do you agree or disagree?

The great public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with the matter of preserving animals as many suggest that the permanent disappearance of these creatures is influenced by forces of nature. However, several sections vehemently protest against this opinion. 

Those rallying behind this notion propose that in the past, a myriad of species have appeared and vanished from this planet: they were not able to adapt to the evolving environment that brought about climatic shifts, transformation in habitats and availability of food. Even today, a similar phenomenon is being experienced, and thus,  mankind does not need to expend its efforts and squander its resources on a futile exercise.

Nonetheless,  humans must undertake this endeavor: it is strongly asserted the historical events may have been driven by alterations in the surroundings, but the current events of animal extinction are perpetrated by humans. The insatiable hunger for development and prosperity has led to rampant deforestation. Large swathes of land are being cleared of greenery to make way for agriculture, industry and dwelling areas, robbing wild fauna of their habitat and food, and causing them to die out. 

Similarly, humans cannot escape the responsibility of protecting animal species as it is their endeavors such as poaching of exotic fauna that is leading to catastrophic outcomes. For instance, it has been reported that elephants, white and black rhino, blue whales, tigers and lions, to name a few, are on the brink of vanishing permanently from the face of the earth due to mindless hunting of these creatures for their body parts and other material.

Overall, the given belief lacks substance as it is the society that has caused this disaster, and therefore, the onus lies on it to do whatever possible to conserve various animal species. 

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.