It is right that college graduates earn higher salaries than the less well-educated in the community. But they should also pay the full cost of their study. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Some conclude that college students should bear total expenses for their higher education on the generalization that college graduates usually receive higher salaries for similar jobs than those without a college degree. We can not deny the fact that higher level of education, indeed, do associate with better income. Still, build on such fact alone, the conclusion remains questionable when more aspects are taken into consideration.

The whole argument in question rests on an assumption that it is always the case that people with higher education make more money than those less well-educated. But salary or income is, in most cases, based on contributions made by employees to companies or organizations in which they are employed. Statistics in the labor market indicate that people with professional training tend to find jobs easier than college graduates do and that blue-collar workers who do not hold college degrees are becoming the hotties in the labor market. Employers prefer to hire and pay more to highly skilled and specially trained people rather than fresh college graduates. In the auto industry, for instance, skilled technicians make two or three times more than their college educated counterparts who make the average salaries in other companies. And it is widely accepted that people’s income is determined more by talent, hard work, and willingness to take risks than solely by certain qualifications such as college education. Otherwise, the unemployment rate of college graduates would not be increasing every year and the rule of supply and demand will lose much of power in controlling the labor market. Admittedly in some knowledge extensive field such as research, teaching, and practice of law the labor force are primarily consists of highly educated professionals. But such people make up only a fraction of the labor market and are thus unrepresentative of the whole employment in general.

Considering the goal of education, we find that it is even more problematic for the country to throw all the responsibility of financing college education to college students. The goal of higher education of a nation is to improve and strengthen the general level of intellectual and professional capacity of its labor force, thereby increasing the competency of the nation in the global economy. As tax payers, parents all contributes to the education system and country in various ways. It is only reasonable and necessary that the country gives some forms of financially assistance to students to ease the burden of rising education costs. Such help should go to not only students from needy or impoverished families but also outstanding students from affluent backgrounds. Doing so can significantly boost the motivation of children from millions of families to engage in higher level of study. It is understandable that the general quality of people in a country will improve and its economy will benefit both now and in years to follow.

If the burden of supporting children’s higher education is dumped on parents and students, thousands of brilliant students will be deprived of chances to pursue their academic inspiration. Among those who suffer would definitely be future great scientists, business managers, artists and statesmen. The loss will be disastrous and irreversible.

In conclusion, the idea that students should also pay the full cost of their study is wrong and harmful because it is wrong to assume that higher education necessarily equalize high income. Moreover, it is in the best interest of a nation to take responsibility in financing college education so that the goal of higher education will be better met.

Topic：Is Education Losing Its Value?

Education: Losing its Value

Today, it seems to be universally accepted that increased education is a good thing. Thousands of colleges and millions of students spend vast amounts of time and money chasing pieces of paper. But what is the value of these qualifications? This essay will discuss whether education has been devalued.

Supporters of education (usually teachers or educators, or those in the business of education) say that increased levels of education will open doors for students. Certificates, diplomas, and degrees are held up as a status symbol, a passport to a private club of money and power.

However, the truly powerful are not those with degrees, but people who stand back and look at what is really important in life. These people are found in every part of society. Like many brilliant people, Einstein was a weak math student. Like many successful businessmen, Bill Gates never completed college. Like many inventive and creative people, Edison never went to school. The greatest religious teachers do not have letters after their name. Similarly, many of the world’s political leaders do not have master’s degrees or doctorates. These are the people who shape our lives, and they are too busy with real life to spend time in the paper chase.

Students in college are being sold an illusion. They are made to believe that self-understanding and society approval will come with the acquisition of a piece of paper. Instead of thinking for themselves, and finding their own personality and strengths, they are fitted like square pegs into round holes, in so-called professional jobs.

The role of education is to prepare masses of people to operate at low levels of ability in a very limited and restricted range of activities. Some of these activities are perhaps more challenging than the assembly lines of the past, but the ultimate purpose is equally uninteresting. More worryingly, despite the increased level of education, people are still not genuinely expected to think for themselves. In fact, the longer years of schooling make the job of brainwashing even easier.

There is still a role for study, research, and education. However, we need to examine our emphasis on education for the sake of a piece of paper, and to learn the real meaning and revolutionary challenge of knowledge. 

376 words

Topic：Is Education Losing Its Value?

Education: Still Invaluable!

In the past, degrees were very unusual in my family. I remember the day my uncle graduated. We had a huge party, and for many years my mother called him "the genius" and listened to his opinion. Today, in comparison five of my brothers and sisters have degrees, and two are studying for their masters'. However, some people think that this increased access to education is devaluing degrees. In this essay, I will look at some of the arguments for and against the increased emphasis on degrees in our society.

People have several arguments against the need for degrees. They say that having so many graduates devalues a degree. People lose respect for the degree holder. It is also claimed that education has become a rat race. Graduates have to compete for jobs even after years of studying. Another point is that studying for such a long time leads to learners becoming inflexible. They know a lot about one narrow subject, but are unable to apply their skills. Employers prefer more flexible and adaptable workers.

However, I feel strongly that this move to having more qualifications is a positive development. In the past education was only for the rich and powerful. Now it is available to everyone, and this will have many advantages for the country and the individual. First of all, it is impossible to be overeducated. The more people are educated, the better the world will be, because people will be able to discuss and exchange ideas. A further point is that people with degrees have many more opportunities. They can take a wider variety of jobs and do what they enjoy doing, instead of being forced to take a job they dislike. Finally, a highly educated workforce is good for the economy of the country. It attracts foreign investment.

In conclusion, although there are undoubtedly some problems with increased levels of education, I feel strongly that the country can only progress if all its people are educated to the maximum of their ability.

339 words

Road Convictions fell dramatically in 1981, from about 480 to 250 people per 10 000, and then declined gradually until 1985. At this point they began a steep rise which peaked at about 3.3% in 1989. The figures fell sharply in 1990 and remained steady over the next year. The conviction rate then fell gradually until 1994 with hardly any change over the next four years. Model answer for exercise 2. Between 1955 and 1960 mortgage interest rates remained fairly constant at around 5%. Over the next decade they climbed steadily to reach around 8.5% in 1977. During the next ten years there was a dramatic rise culminating in a maximum of 20% in 1987. From then to 1995 the rate fell sharply back to the pre 1977 level of around 8.5%. Levels fluctuated over the next 3 years, varying between 8.5 and 11%.

Task1:

Large tree grows just near your house, producing troubles for you. Write a letter to local authority explaining this problem, discuss the ways of its resolution and make enquiries about financial aspect.

To: mr. S. Brown,
local authority org.
35, Willow av.,
Greencity, Russia.
Tel: (812) 345-46-76
Fax: 534-87-78
Telex: (812) 657-78-89
e-mail: local_authority@net

From: Helen Apple,
13, Willow Av.,
Greencity, Russia.
Tel: (812) 345-46-70

Dear Sir,

I am writing to you to apply for a big tree located just near my house. This tree really troubles me. The fact is that the tree stands in sun's light and because of that a close-fitting room is too dark and gloomy. Also I must tell you we use that room as a nursery. Our son is only two months old and is still weak. As to me, I am his mother and I must be sure that I do my best to take care of him. But the tree doesn't let my son to receive enough sunlight and I am pushed to ask you to solve this problem.

I would welcome the sooner opportunity to meet with you to discuss the subject. I hope the tree has to be out. To tell the truth the tree is quite old and can fall down any time and I can't imagine that crash may happen.

While I am waiting for your decision, I hope that I am allowed to put away branches which directly cover the window. If I am allowed to do it, just call me as soon as possible and tell about it.

Addly, I want to know how much the cutting of the tree may cost and who must pay it. And which part of the payment our family has to pay. Also, I am interesting in possible discounts.

I will appreciate your prompt reply.
Yours faithfully, mrs. Apply.

Road Convictions fell dramatically in 1981, from about 480 to 250 people per 10 000, and then declined gradually until 1985. At this point they began a steep rise which peaked at about 3.3% in 1989. The figures fell sharply in 1990 and remained steady over the next year. The conviction rate then fell gradually until 1994 with hardly any change over the next four years. Model answer for exercise 2. Between 1955 and 1960 mortgage interest rates remained fairly constant at around 5%. Over the next decade they climbed steadily to reach around 8.5% in 1977. During the next ten years there was a dramatic rise culminating in a maximum of 20% in 1987. From then to 1995 the rate fell sharply back to the pre 1977 level of around 8.5%. Levels fluctuated over the next 3 years, varying between 8.5 and 11%.

Task1: You rent a house through an agency. The heating system has stopped working. You phoned the agency a week ago but it has still not been mended. Write a letter to the agency. Explain the situation and tell them what you want them to do about it.

To: mr. S. Brown,
Manager
Best Agency Ltd.,
35, Willow av.,
Greencity, Russia.
Tel: (812) 345-46-76
Fax: 534-87-78
Telex: (812) 657-78-89
e-mail: local_authority@net

From: Helen Apple,
13, Willow Av.,
Greencity, Russia.
Tel: (812) 345-46-70

Dear Sir,
I am writing to you to inform you my heating system hasn't been working since the 5 th of December this year. I contacted your company and explained mr. S. Switch on the 7 th of November that my heating system has stooped working. But the situation hasn't changed till now.

The reason why it happened is not clear for me. Besides I have no possibility to repair the heating system myself and my waiting for the heating is very unpleasant for me and my family. To say more, the weather was really cold and I had to buy necessary warm clothes and a thick carpet to keep warm in the flat. I have bought a minimum of necessities:

a sweater - $107.34
pants - $38.67
a pair of socks - $04.44
a carpet - $1034.00

I cannot hide my disappointment but I still believe that "Best Agency" is a good and reputable company. And I hope that the situation can be solved by the following ways: to compensate all my expenses according to the checks and , of course, I am expected the heating in my flat as soon as possible. Otherwise will be getting more and more expenses and I shall be obliged to address these claims to the superior authorities, that I do not want to do.

Your prompt actions and your quick answer will be appreciated by me, by my children, my grandparents and all my relatives.

With best wishes, mrs. Apple.

Many old building are protected by law because they are part of a nation's history. However, some people think knocked down to make way for new ones because people need houses and offices. How important is it to maintain old buildings? Should history stand in the way of progress?

Old buildings sometimes conflicts with social advancement. Appealing as it is in the eyes of business people, tearing down old architect to make room for real-estate development is not a wise idea in many ways.

The primarily reason is that old buildings, like our native language, forms our cultural identity and keep a unique record the history of a country. From this aspect, old buildings are considered very valuable as one of the symbols of the culture of a nation. For instance, the traditional Chinese residence in Beijing, Siheyuan, are once seen as the remains of the Old World, and were destroyed by people shortly after the founding of People’s Republic of China. Until recently did the people and policy makers as well realize that it is an inexcusable and stupid idea to commit such a terrible deed because old buildings, once gone, are not restorable. But their economic values and aesthetic appeals have just caught the attention of Chinese people.

Moreover, old buildings, if planed and preserved properly, could coexist with modern real-estate development. In France, aged buildings bring millions of dollars of revenue for the government and amazed thousands of tourists. Yet no one thinks the high-rising office buildings and apartment buildings make the old architect a sore of the eye. By contrast, the new learn from the old, a fact that makes them more attractive.

We admit that not all old buildings should be treated equally and some of them do need to be torn down for various reasons such as safety and new buildings. However, we should not be too blind to see their value too. If only the real and practical factors are being considered, the country will be sorry for its loss in years to come.

As we have discussed, old buildings are part of a country’s history and are valuable in many ways. We should plan well and be wise enough to see their value. But the same time, we should also do our best to find solutions to make the old and the new coexist in harmony.

It is generally believed that education is of vital importance in individuals’ development and well-being of societies. What should education consist of to fulfill both these functions?

With the rapid development of modern society, education is becoming more and more crucial to both individuals and societies. The issue over what education should consist of has considerably aroused people’s wide concern. In this essay, I seek to explore this complicated topic from diverse perspectives and what influence could be brought.

Among the most important aspects education should consist of, one should be stressed is professional knowledge education. On one hand, under the fierce competitive circumstance, people who have professional skills and experience attract many big companies. Therefore, study about one special area gives people more opportunities to hurt an ideal job. On the other hand, this education is also significant to develop societies in a long run.

At the second place, what is also worth noticing is that physical education is necessary for students, especially for teenagers. If you want to achieve successfully in the modern societies, strong body is the first premise, which makes you always in sharp. So education should push people to take care themselves and this could bring great benefits to the healthy society.

Last but not least, we should not lose sight of psychological education. Psychological problems are serious nowadays and a sizable percentage of people suffer from them. A survey conducted by a famous research organization indicates that over 40 percent of students have various psychological problems, who really need help from school and society. Even worse, if such problems cannot be solved, they could hamper the progress of well-being society.

Judging from what I have been discussed above, we may safely draw the conclusion that three aspects cannot be separated in education, which play vital important roles in the growth of individuals and societies. The fulfillment of both people and societies can be done as long as we lay emphasis on three aspects mentioned above.

Crime is without doubt a huge problem in every country in the world. There are certain countries, cities, towns and districts where the crime rate is extremely high and such places are very dangerous places to be. Without doubt these areas desperately need new government policies and a shift in actions by the police to remedy a desperate situation. These places tend to be areas of high unemployment and poverty. If the focus were placed on finding and creating jobs in these places the crime problem would improve. Instead governments go for easy options such as increasing the lengths of prison sentences. This treats the results of crime, not it’s causes.

Nevertheless, such places are few and far between. The vast majority of places in the world are perfectly safe places to live. People who are afraid to leave their homes do so largely for two reasons. Firstly, they were unfortunate enough to be victim of a crime. Secondly, and most importantly, they hear about crime everywhere: TV, radio, papers. In some areas crime stories take up a huge percentage of news. If you hear about crime all the time, you begin to believe its everywhere. This is simply not the case.

Crime has been around since man first appeared on earth and will continue to be here till we leave. Of course there are measures governments could take to improve the situation but they can’t eradicate crime. What measures should be taken depend on ones political opinions.

University students now focus on a special subject. Some people believe that universities should encourage their students to study a whole range of subjects. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, many students spend time concentrating on their majors while neglecting the study of other subjects. This phenomenon has attracted people’s attention on whether or not the universities should encourage students to study all the subjects available for them. Some people claim that studying a whole range of subjects may divert students’ attention on their majors, making the students good at nothing. Some people, on the other hand, contend that learning a variety of things is good for the students’ development. Speaking for myself, I take sides on the latter.

First of all, learning various subjects can extend students’ scope of knowledge. People might never realize how little they know about certain things until they read articles or books relevant and even worse when conversations start. Extensive reading of different subjects can help to release the inferior complex when such situation occurs. They may also be proud of themselves and become confident in study since they know a lot. In addition, some subjects can teach students how to balance work and life, comment current affairs and cultivate students’ common sense of life as well. All these benefits can make students become knowledgeable.

Learning a range of subjects can also add spice to the students’ studies. Students may be fed up with study when they concentrate on a special subject constantly to the exclusion of other subjects. Despite the fact that studying many subjects can occupy part of the time for students to study their majors, it can facilitate the students to enrich their campus life and maintain their interest in study.

Most important of all, studying more can cultivate students’ logical thinking and make them become more creative and competent, which is of great significance to their further development. It is commonly believed that most of the subjects are linked to each other, to some extend. With a range of knowledge, students can find different solutions to approach the problems they encounter either at work or in life, which will definitely make the students more creative and innovative in the field they specialize in. Clearly, the students with all-around knowledge have an apparent advantage over those specializing in only one subject. Thus, students should make effort to acquire more knowledge in their study periods so that they will not be eliminated in the severe competition in the era of information explosion.

In a word, studying a variety of subjects is beneficial to the university students. In this case, not only can the students better themselves, but also become adaptable and flexible in the increasingly challenging and competitive world. It is advisable that students spend time learning more subjects instead of focusing on a specific subject, so that they can prepare themselves and cater for the even-accelerated society.

Advantages and disadvantages of private cars. 小汽车的利与弊。

With the fantastic spur both in industry and in economy in China, the number of people who own private cars is on the rise. Some people have bought cars of their own, and others are planning to buy cars. But there have been two quite different views on this phenomenon.

Some claim that there are many advantages brought about by cars. First, the automobile industry provides jobs for countless workers and strong support for other industries. Second, if conditions permit, owning a car can make us work more efficiently. Finally, life will become more convenient. A car allows one to move freely and with a car there is no need to wait for the bus in the cold or under the burning sun.

However, others strongly object to the increase in developing private cars. They hold that automobiles will give rise to a series of problems. In the first place, as more and more cars are produced and run in the street, a large volume of poisonous gas will be given off, polluting the atmosphere and causing actual harm to the health of people. Next, private cars contr123te to traffic congestion so greatly that the advantages gained in comfort and freedom are often cancelled out by the frustration caused by traffic jams. The last problem is the increasing number of car accidents that have killed and will kill a lot of people in a friction of a second.

In my opinion, although automobiles have been playing a vital part in the daily activities of our society, they also bring us numerous troubles such as more serious environmental pollution, more traffic accidents and more 123rgy consumption. They drink up huge amounts of fuel and throw out huge amounts of pollutants. Traffic accidents kill thousands and thousands of people each year and cripple more. Jams waste our precious time. Therefore I am against developing private cars.

Crime is without doubt a huge problem in every country in the world. There are certain countries, cities, towns and districts where the crime rate is extremely high and such places are very dangerous places to be. Without doubt these areas desperately need new government policies and a shift in actions by the police to remedy a desperate situation. These places tend to be areas of high unemployment and poverty. If the focus were placed on finding and creating jobs in these places the crime problem would improve. Instead governments go for easy options such as increasing the lengths of prison sentences. This treats the results of crime, not it’s causes.

Nevertheless, such places are few and far between. The vast majority of places in the world are perfectly safe places to live. People who are afraid to leave their homes do so largely for two reasons. Firstly, they were unfortunate enough to be victim of a crime. Secondly, and most importantly, they hear about crime everywhere: TV, radio, papers. In some areas crime stories take up a huge percentage of news. If you hear about crime all the time, you begin to believe its everywhere. This is simply not the case.

Crime has been around since man first appeared on earth and will continue to be here till we leave. Of course there are measures governments could take to improve the situation but they can’t eradicate crime. What measures should be taken depend on ones political opinions.

The government should control the amount of violence in films and on television in order to decrease the violent crimes in society.  To what extent do you agree or disagree with this issue?

It is widely acknowledged that the amount of violence in films and on TV is one of the direct causes that lead to our high crime rate in our society.  The voice of demanding the government to control violent scenes in media has been much louder than before.  Personally, I totally agree with this voice, for it is the most effective way to reduce violent crimes in the real world.

First and foremost, violence on TV or in films is often portrayed as extreme as possible in order to attract audiences.  This will definitely set a bad example for those immature audiences, who, lacking correct parental guidance, are most likely to copy the violent behaviours and commit real violent crimes.

Next, media, such as TV or film, is considered as the correct information source regulated by the government.  It should be reporting and reflecting true phenomena in the society.  Violence, as one of the facts in the real world, certainly has to be reported.  However, excessive violence is offering misleading information to the public, which will exert detrimental influence to the society.  For example, teenagers will regard those killers and murderers in the films and on TV as role models and copy their behaviours.  It is recently reported in the news that a seventeen-year-old killed all his family members, one sister and two parents out of hatred and jealousy.  In the real world, we are often reminded of the harm and hurt that violence in fictional world has brought us.

In a word, our society is preoccupied by the violent scenes and plots at present. What the government has to do immediately is to take effective measures to control the amount of violence in media.  Only in this way, can our society enjoy high level of security and peace.
 

With our entrance to 21st century, there rises the controversy of whether our future would turn to the bright one. Many people claim that 21st century would be taken into a positive way through scientific and technological advance while a great number of pessimists argue that our future is threat123d by lots of ongoing disasters. As for me, I prefer a balanced view that there will be crisis and opportunities.

On one hand, we have reasons to be optimistic. For one thing, the development of information technology will make it possible to for all the people in the world to communicate with each other easily. Take the internet as an example. A simple click on the mouse could lead you to every place and person all over the world. For another, as the medical treatment develops, it could be expected that there will be cure for such deadly diseases as cancer and AIDS and that human beings would be able to enjoy a long life expectancy. Moreover, with the ongoing mechanization, an increasing amount of dangerous and heavy-labor work would tend to be taken by the robot. In this case, man can work in more safe and comfortable conditions, as well as enjoy more leisure time.

On the other hand, it can be foreseen that there may be crises in the future. First, people will run high risk of psychological problems for dealing with computers in long-term is likely to cause the loneliness and infantile autism. Consequently the rate of suicide would experience a sharp rise. Besides, there is possibility that the robot would take over the earth, enslaving our mankind who is originally its creator. Furthermore, it is not impossible that a global nuclear war would break out. As a result, none of all creatures on the earth can escape this disaster so that from then on the civil history comes to an end.

From the discussion above, it can be concluded that we would confront both opportunities and crises. The advanced science and technology could obtain merit and drawback. So what I hope to see in the future is that we can enjoy healthier and longer life and that more and more science and technology will be employed in the peaceful way.

The government should control the amount of violence in films and on television in order to decrease the violent crimes in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this issue?

Violence appears more and more often in films and on television. Requests are made that the government should take action because it leads to the rise of violent crimes in society.  However, some people think differently.

They say that instead of inducing people to commit a crime, violence on TV helps people to release the stress put on them by the fast pace of the modern society and thus reduces the chance for them to break the law.  The employee who was severely criticized by the boss at work may feel relieved when he returns home and sees a strong man being punched in his face on TV.

Admittedly, that may be one little good effect of violence on screen, but the side effect of it is much 123ious and should not be ignored. As was mentioned in the beginning of the essay, violence on screen does result in more crimes in real life. For one thing, teenagers are good at intimating and they have a strong desire to release their extra 123rgy.  One good example of this is the notorious campus gun shot case in the US.  The criminal, a university student, who shot several of his teachers and fellow students, confessed that a violent movie inspired him.  Lastly, violence in films and television fills people’s mind with evil and hatred. We certainly should be shown the better side of our society if we want to decrease the violent crimes.

To sum up, in order to have fewer violent crimes in society, violence on screen should be controlled.  (292)

Nowadays we can enjoy the same films, fashions, brands, advertisements and TV channels. The evident difference between countries is disappearing. To what extent do you think the disadvantages overweight the advantages of this?

Globalization creates conditions for widening international exchanges, strengthening mutual understanding between nations, expanding cultural, educational, and scientific cooperation between nations and countries, enjoying the cultural achievements of people around the world which encourages the process of modernization and the enrichment of national culture.

However, these conditions also create the possible danger of diminishing the national culture with a negative impact on the pre123vation of national identity. Through globalization and an open door policy, erroneous concepts and a lowering of ethical standards, a selfish and individualistic lifestyle and harmful cultural products can easily be imported into the country. At present, modern information technology which in the main is controlled by US is hourly and intensively disseminating US ideology, way of life, culture and films across the world. Even US food is promoted so that some people consider globalization as global Americanization.

During the process of economic globalization, inequality between developed and developing countries has been increasing and the gap between the rich and the poor has become wider, most of the result of globalization go to assist developed countries. Globalization does not pose equal interests and risks to all nations. With an overwhelming advantage compared to most of the developing countries in terms of finance and the level of science and technology, developed ca123alist countries control the situation of economic globalization.

For these reasons, globalization is a fierce and complicated struggle in both cultural and ideological fields. We take the initiative in international economic integration but also have to take the initiative in fighting to keep our distinct culture resisting pro-foreign and cross-bred phenomena, and overcoming the psychology of preferring money over ethical values.
 

Some people think visitors to other countries should imitate local custom and behaviors. Other people disagree that the host country should welcome culture diversity. To what extend do you agree?

Identifying the foreign customs is a difficult task for any visitors. Cultural conflicts may occur when one does not know much about the strange social codes other than his own country. In reality, people’s opinion about whether the host country should encourage cultural differences or to what degree should they accept the alien cultures as they may cause annoyance to them. In my opinion, I insist that the local customs should be highly respected in many occasions but not necessarily be followed blindly.

The primary concern is given to the significance of one’s national traditions and heritage that has been passed down. It is important because all these customs has undergone thousands of years of practice and become the treasure of a nation. For instance, the eating tradition in many areas and regions such as people eat red eggs when they have a new baby, eating jiaozi—a kind of Chinese dumpling when we celebrate Chinese lunar year, and still eating when someone’s grandpa passed away. This might be a blunt for many visitors who first come here. Visitors in such a situation may choose to practice as if he were a local or he may just see and enjoy the atmosphere.

Even if visitors keep a stance away from the traditions of a foreign country, they should not be h123le to them. The reason is simple. If the visitors refuse to take the fact that the local customs may of123d their faith or something they believe, and even they are disheartening, they will possibly act improperly under such situation. Take eating out custom as example, Chinese people when eating out, there are always a person who masters the table and even pays the bill. This might be of123sive to a foreign who does not get used to this manner. But as we Chinese people say” Ru Xiang Sui Su” literally means that one should get used to the local customs when visiting it, this is a reflection of what we discuss here about the culture diversity.

In general, one should see how he knows about the cultures and how he should react upon it. There are no fixed rules to be followed. What seems important is “when in Rome; do as the Romans do” philosophy applies to many situations when one feel uncertain about the host culture.

Unlike other countries, police in UK do not carry guns. Some think it leaves citizen unprotected, others think it reduce the overall violence in the society. Please discuss.

At the mention of a policeman, most people will have in their mind the image of a strong man or woman with a gun on his belt.  But it is not the case in UK: police there do not carry guns.  People’s opinions towards this vary.

Some people think this contributes to the decrease of violence in society.  For one thing, when a robber sees a policeman pointing a gun at him, he may get exasperated and desperate and, out of despair, he may hurt people around him.  If the policeman does not carry a gun, nothing of the kind will happen.  For another, to err is human and no one can guarantee that a policeman does not mis-shoot the pedestrians when he is hurriedly chasing a criminal.  Lastly, some policemen have committed 123ious crimes with the guns they had.

However, other people hold different views: police without guns leave citizens unprotected.  To begin with, at critical moments, guns in policemen’s hands can be essential in fighting against the criminals.  Imagine a bank robber pointing a gun at the head of a hostage.  A policeman can hardly do anything about it if he does not carry a gun.  However, the situation can be totally reversed otherwise.  Moreover, policemen are well-trained and thus rarely hurt innocent people with their guns.

As far as I am concerned, the latter is more favorable.  To my mind, policemen are the very few people on earth who should carry guns, with which they can effectively protect the citizens. (283 words)

Are cars doing more harm than good?

Arguments
1. Cars are evils resulting from modernization, for they make people suffer rather than enjoy life.
2. Traffic accidents caused by cars not only bring death and injury, but also make people suffer mentally and psychologically.
3. Every year car owners have to pay vast sums to the exchequer: road tax, purchase tax, oil tax, etc. This is a big drain on their resources.
4. Since China has such a large population, the popularisation of private cars will only bring about 123ious social problems.
5. Cars should be done away with. We should try to find a safer means of transport which will bring joy and comfort rather than injury and death.
6. The roads are so often jammed with cars that ambulances and fire engines find it difficult to fulfil their duties.
7. People's hidden frustrations and disappointments are brought to the surface when they drive.
8. Road networks for cars have not only made cities uninhabitable, but also desecrated the countryside.
9. Cars often produce air pollution and fill the cities with unbearable noise.
10. Cars are the cause of traffic accidents. All over the world thousands upon thousands of people are killed or injured every year.

Counter-arguments

1. Motor cars are highly desirable for obvious reasons. We should recognize this and adapt ourselves.
2. Motor cars enable people to become more mobile. Without cars, the world would still consist of isolated communities.
3. If there are more cars in China's rural areas, people can get to cities more easily. The gap between town and country will become smaller.
4. Possessing a car gives one a much greater degree of mobility, enabling him to move around freely.
>5. The owner of a car is not forced to rely on public transport and is, therefore, not compelled to work locally.
6. Long distances can be covered rapidly and pleasantly.
7. Buses are often crowded and slow, especially during rush-hour. If there are more cars, people can get around more easily.
8. With the popularisation of cars, the suburbs will become more developed, and the downtown area will be less crowded.
9. Cars and motorists are not to blame for road accidents. Problems like too many road signs, faulty traffic lights, sudden narrowing of a street and congested parking are the real cause of traffic accidents.
10. There must be universal adoption of multi-storey and underground car parks so that car-parks won’t become a problem.

The bar chart compares the proportion of employees of both genders employed in executive positions in ACME oil company within a one year period between July 1993 and June 1994. As can be seen from the chart, the percentage of male employees generally increased with the rise of the job categories from Grade E to Grade A while the opposite was true with that of women.

Grade A, which was reported as the highest position, was a male dominated one in which only one-tenth of the staff were female while male employees accounted for the rest.

When it comes to Grade B and C, man also made up over half of the employees, accounting for 80% and 60%, which are 50% and 10% more than that of woman respectively.

However,, the situation in the other two job categories which were relatively lower was totally converse with women taking up larger proportions. Men constituted roughly 40% in Grade D, 20% less than that of woman and most of the working staff in Grade E were women (over 70) , twice as much as that of men.

Task Two:
Question: News editors decide what to broadcast on television and what to print in newspapers. What factors do you think influence these decisions? Do we become used to bad news? Would it be better if more good news was reported?

Answer:
Nowadays the contents on TV and in newspapers are decided by news editors.
In my essay, I would like to discuss the contributing factors to these
decisions, whether we become used to bad news, and whether it is better
if we received more good news.

First of all, as far as I am concerned, it is a common intention of news editors that any thing reported in TV or news papers must be something attractive to the public, simply because such things sell the best. Therefore we can easily figure out that things exciting, amazing, uncommon, even overwhelming will be the news editors’ first choice.
第一句参考：First of all, the common intention of news editors, in my point of view, is to make everything reported be something attractive to the public. And this contributes greatly to those editors’ decision making.

Secondly, honestly I’m not quite sure whether we become used to bad news. Although people frequently view bad news in media, many viewers tend to ignore this kind of information. Moreover, some bad news, such as the regional wars, is still the hot topic among people, whilst other bad news, such as plane crashes and natural disasters, etc., can’t catch our attention. 作者先说“not sure”紧接着下一句，“很多人倾向于忽略这些坏消息”，多少有些前后矛盾。第一句建议改为：Secondly, though people are frequently exposed to bad news, many of them tend to ignore most of the bad news except some hot ones concerning regional wars.

Lastly, to the issue whether it is better if we received more good news, I believe the answer is that we are benefited from the true stories more, no matter if they are good or bad. To support this argument, I would like to state: firstly, people will not书面语中尽量不缩写 be more positive if they receive more good news nor be the other way around if they receive more bad ones. Next, I doubt the truth of a piece of news if it doesn’t merely represent the original story, but has to carry the editors’ personal intention. Last but not least, we need the media to tell us exactly what is happening in the world without any subjective inclination.
In a word, media should present us the world as the way it is.

Air transport is increasingly used to export some types of fruits and vegetables to countries where those plants can not grow or are out of season. Some say it is a good thing, but others consider this use of transport cannot be justified. What do you think?
 
Nowadays, there is no denying that air transport has become a heated argument on which people hold quite diverse standpoints. Some people claim that different types of fruits and vegetables can be exported to countries where those plants are everyday requisites that are not available in the market, while others advocate that this use of transport cannot be justified. As far as I am concerned, I am of the viewpoint that it is essentially important to make good use of air transport, provided that it is properly regulated and superintended by corresponding government watchdogs.

Firstly, air transport can cater for the basic needs of those people who have almost no access to those daily necessities since these fruits and vegetables are out of their local market. Recent surveys have found that nearly 60% of the countries or regions all over the world have to import goods and products from other countries with an aim to satisfying people's requirements, and among those things from other countries such agricultural products as fruits and vegetables rank in the first place.

Furthermore, air transport can not only boost the local economy but also increase the fiscal revenue of the government. Furthermore, the government can take advantage of the money to improve the living standard of the locals. Only in this way can local residents benefit a great deal form air transport.

Last but not least, air transport allows countries in the world to specialize in the state-of-the-art techniques of manufacturing and processing in order to optimize natural resources that are the most valuable wealth that human beings shall cherish so as to stimulate their economy continuously since the trend of global cooperation and co123boration is inevitable and indispensable.

From the above-mentioned analysis, we can easily reach the conclusion that air transport of fruits and vegetables plays a vital and indispensable role in both people' life and the country's economy, and I have the convicted faith that people will really utilize it positively and proactively.

Air transport is increasingly used to export some types of fruits and vegetables to countries where those plants can not grow or are out of season. Some say it is a good thing, but others consider this use of transport cannot be justified. What do you think?
 
Nowadays, there is no denying that air transport has become a heated argument on which people hold quite diverse standpoints. Some people claim that different types of fruits and vegetables can be exported to countries where those plants are everyday requisites that are not available in the market, while others advocate that this use of transport cannot be justified. As far as I am concerned, I am of the viewpoint that it is essentially important to make good use of air transport, provided that it is properly regulated and superintended by corresponding government watchdogs.

Firstly, air transport can cater for the basic needs of those people who have almost no access to those daily necessities since these fruits and vegetables are out of their local market. Recent surveys have found that nearly 60% of the countries or regions all over the world have to import goods and products from other countries with an aim to satisfying people's requirements, and among those things from other countries such agricultural products as fruits and vegetables rank in the first place.

Furthermore, air transport can not only boost the local economy but also increase the fiscal revenue of the government. Furthermore, the government can take advantage of the money to improve the living standard of the locals. Only in this way can local residents benefit a great deal form air transport.

Last but not least, air transport allows countries in the world to specialize in the state-of-the-art techniques of manufacturing and processing in order to optimize natural resources that are the most valuable wealth that human beings shall cherish so as to stimulate their economy continuously since the trend of global cooperation and co123boration is inevitable and indispensable.

From the above-mentioned analysis, we can easily reach the conclusion that air transport of fruits and vegetables plays a vital and indispensable role in both people' life and the country's economy, and I have the convicted faith that people will really utilize it positively and proactively.

The following table gives statistics showing the aspects of quality of life in five countries.

The figures reveal the quality of life in five countries in 1982, namely Bangladesh, Bolivia, Egypt, Indonesia and the U.S.A.

It is clear from the table that Americans’ GNP was considerably higher than that of others, achieving at 13160 do123rs; its daily calorie supply for each person was also the highest at 3652. Meanwhile, Americans enjoyed the longest life expectancy at 74 years, while their infant mortality rate was the lowest at only 1.2%.

In contrast, the people in Bangladesh lived the poorest lives of all. This was most evident in its GNP at 140do123rs, being only one tenth of American, as well as the lowest of five countries. Besides, its and life expectancy were also the least at 1877 each person and 40 years respectively, while its infant mortality rate was the highest at 13.2% being ten times of American.

The other three countries maintain middle positions. The GNP of them, in decreasing order, were Egypt ($690), Indonesia ($580) and Bolivia ($570). The similar patterns can be seen in the other three columns. Specifically, life expectancy in Indonesia was 1 year less Bolivian, whereas its infant mortality rate was 10% less, compared with Egyptian,

Overall, we can see that there are significant differences in every aspect of quality of life in five countries.

Title: Many people are optimistic towards 21^st Century and see it as an opportunity to make positive changes to the world. To what extend do you agree or disagree with their optimism?

What changes would you like to make in the new century? ( 我考试的时候没见到这句话，但网上每个人的回忆中都说有，我到现在也不知道我那次考试中到底包不包含这句话，晕！)

Currently, confronted with the tremendous advancement of the late 20th Century, certain proportion of people hold a positive view towards 21st Century, deeming it a precious chance to change the world positively, which consequently triggered a contentious debate. Attitudes towards this issue are divergent.

Advocates allege that 21st Century is undoubtedly a peaceful era, which enables to live a harmonious live and generally make some positive changes. Unlike in the yeasty years a century before, wars and conflicts are largely eliminated and economy is the core of this completely new century. Hence, as the divergence of cultures becomes less apparent, it is time that people around the world enhanced cooperation in every sphere, in order to establish the so-call global village. 51ielts.com

Opponents, nonetheless, cast serious doubts on the proponents’ opinions. As they claims, 21st is absolutely not a no-war-period, rather, it is the very era that allows certain powerful countries to overindulge their boundless ambitions and eventually overwhelm other countries. In this strong-country-dominated age, it is ridiculous to be optimistic and any attempt to make positive changes is naive. 

All in all, both sides have solid foundations. Personally, I tend to side with the former. First and foremost, having witnessed the basically stable situation in the late 20th Century, it is reasonable for us to believe that it is the right time for positive changes. Additionally, in the era of globalization, separate power is not enough for achieving success whereas cooperation equals to successfulness, which has been evidenced in numerous cases. Therefore, it is imperative that some modifications be made in this pivotal moment; otherwise we may miss the hard-won opportunity. As for the changes, I think apart from reinforcing cooperation, division of labor is also of vital importance. For instance, in developed countries, some high-tech industries should be encouraged, whilst in developing countries, it is wiser for developing traditional industries and agriculture. 

Are pets good for mankind?

Arguments

1. Pets are of particular importance to children in this Plastic Age when most of us live in large cities.
2. Watching the everyday activities of a pet helps a child to understand nature and cope with problems.
3. Learning to care for a pet helps a child to grow up into a loving adult who feels responsible towards those dependent on him.
4. The great virtue of pets is that they can keep us company.
5. A pet is kept as a companion that makes us feel happy. It's suggested that pets should be sent to astronauts in a spacecraft to help reduce their loneliness.
6. Besides providing mere companionship, pets invite us to love and be loved.
7. Often a cat or a dog can comfort us at times when human words don't help.
8. Animals can communicate with each other in their particular way. They communicate with human beings, too, for they are quick to sense anger and sorrow.
9. People keep pets for emotional rather than economic reasons.
10. A pet dog brings its master (owner) a sense of confidence, for he cell see in the dog that faithfulness does exist and he does have something to trust.

Counter-arguments

1. Keeping pets is just a waste of time and resources.
2. The growing number of pets has caused serious hygiene problems that cannot be solved.
3. The earth will no longer be a world of human beings and animals but a world of aninkals only if we don't take measures to stop the increase of pets.
4. Pet dogs and cats of both *es should be sterilized because the animals themselves are in danger of becoming the first victims for the simple reason that their owners don't have enough time for too many of them.
5. Pets are humanized by those who keep pets. Owing to their need for a home, for food and drink, pets are tamed and idealized by their owners.
6. People nowadays are so crazy about pets that they even neglect caring for their own children.
7. A campaign should be launched against the overpopulation of pets.
8. As a matter of fact those who keep pets don't always treat their pets with kindness. They sometimes abandon their pets when they go away on holiday- and are unable to take the pets along with them.
9. It's really against nature to cage birds, chain dogs and keep cats within the house.
10. Pets are animals. They should be seen in their natural habitat rather than in the homes of human beings.

Do advertisements play a positive or negative role in our society?

Arguments

1. Advertisements provide the most direct comprehensive and detailed information. We get to know about household goods from advertisements.
2. Advertising itself is a business that has provided a great number of jobs.
3. With advertisements, people save a lot of time in shopping, looking for jobs, etc.
4. Daily life needs advertisements because the main function of advertising is to disseminate information on commodities, services, culture, employment, student enrolment and even marriage.
5. A cheerful, witty advertisement makes such a difference to a drab wall or a newspaper full of news of calamities.
6. Without advertisements, newspapers, commercial radios and television companies could not survive.
7. You can find a job or rent an apartment, buy or sell a house, etc. by way of advertising.
8. Advertising is a process of artistic creation.
9. Advertising creates mass markets. Without advertisements, manufacturers may find it difficult to sell their products.
10. Advertising helps stabilize industry and employment, improves quality, and, by competition, helps keep prices within bounds.

Counter-arguments

1. Advertisements are imposed upon a captive audience: e.g. on television.
2. Advertisements on TV are a nuisance: they interrupt television progranunes at a shocking frequency.
3. Consumers have to pay more for the goods owing to the advertising expenses: high prices are maintained by such artificial means.
4. Advertisements are simply misleading and cheating. They are filled with flowery phrases and empty promises.
5. Fake advertising cheats consumers and, in some serious cases, threatens gullible people's lives.
6. Advertisers are inconsiderate to the public. What they care about is making money.
7. Advertisements are not based on the quality of the goods, but on the principle that if one keeps talking about the same thing long enough, eventually people will pay attention to it.
8. Advertisements are an insidious form of brainwashing, using the same techniques, like slogans, catchphrases, etc.
9. Some advertising is offensive: it appeals to base instincts.
10. Advertising cheapens the quality of life: most ads are in poor taste.

Taske2: many empolyees work at home uesing mordern technology.this is more benefit to workers, not to employers!what extend do you argree or disgree?

Progressions in telecommunications technology have enabled the practice of telecommuting,which means workers can conduct their assigned tasks without having to commute back and forth to work regularly.This emerging working pattern has profound  implications on our work and life.Some assert that only workers,not the employers,can be beneficiaries of telecommuting.Personally,I cannot go along with their view.

Granted,telecommuting can bestow numerous benefits upon the employees123 begin with,employees do not have to live with the constant fear that their boss may look over their shoulders,as their  work is supervised from far away and in more laissez faire fashions.There is no need for them to get super well-groomed and they can "slack off" a bit when the work-induced stress is too intense to bear.They can even do aerobics or take showers to refresh themselves provided they can meet the deadline set by their bosses.Furthermore,telecommuting can spare workers the everyday chore of traveling back and forth to work.And this,in turn,helps them to cut down on costs of bus fare,fuel or extravagant work clothes.Lastly,telecommuters can dedicate far more time to their spouse and offspring than office-bound workers.This can,doubtless,strengthen their family ties or may even salvage dysfunctional households.

Yet it would be erroneous if we fail to ackowledge the advantages telecommuting can confer on the employers.In the first place,less constraints,less peer pressure at work,no office politics and more flexible schedules can boost employee morale and  enhance productivity.Empirical evidence abounds in this respect that more occupational freedom can,more often than not,lead to stronger vocational motivation and more innovative ideas.Hence,employers may well be better off not keeping tabs on their workers nine to five every weekday.In the second place telecommuting work force can help business-owners substantially curtail the overhead costs,such as the costs of rent and utilities.Thirdly,the fact that workers can telecommute via the worldwide communications network allows employers to recruit people from remote locations or even half way around the globe,thereby markedly augmenting the labor pool of businesses.Last but not least,employers will not be plagued by petty concerns such as absenteeism and excessive sick leaves anymore if workers telecommute.

To conclude,I concede that telecommuting can bring about a variety of boons to employees.However,it would be unjustifiable if we overlooked the advantages telecommuting can spawn on the employers' side.And we should strive to seek out the most effective approach to exploit this win-win situation. (Patrick)

Does fashion contribute anything to society?

Arguments

1. A good appearance may help people make a better impression in social contacts.
2. When people are getting old, they should pay more attention to their appearance.
3. The way people are dressed helps them to preserve a sense of their own value and personality.
4. Fashion adds spice to life with its rich colour, variety, and beauty.
5. Men and women follow fashions in order to please each other and themselves.
6. The world will be a dull place to live in if people always wear clothes of the same style and colour.
7. Mass production makes well-designed clothes cheap and available to everyone.
8. The fashion industry is an enormous one. It provides employment for people like textile workers, designers, shopkeepers, etc.
9. The fashion industry has helped industrial research in the sense that a lot of new materials, like nylon, rayon, etc. have been made to meet the demand of the consumers.
10. Being well dressed is of psychological importance because confidence in one's appearance leads to confidence in one's success in life.

Counter-arguments

1. People sometimes look odd with the so-called fashionable hairstyles, make-up, and dresses.
2. Top designers in Paris and London are dictatorial, for they lay down the law and the whole world rushes to obey.
3. Fashion goes like this: one year, one thing; the next year, the reverse.
4. People are so vain that they are afraid of being seen in old-fashioned clothes.
5. People, especially the fashionmongers, are blackmailed by fashion designers and stores.
6. Changing fashions is a deliberate creation of waste because one will have to discard a lot of new clothes in order to follow fashions.
7. Fashion designers are not interested in important things like warmth, comfort, and durability of the clothes. They are only interested in outward appearance and profits.
8. The odder the clothes, the more expensive they are, and the more fashionable they become. It's a great pity that people have lost their appreciation of real beauty.
9. In order to follow fashions, people have to put up with great discomfort, such as suffering from cold in winter.
10. One's confidence does not grow from the way one is dressed, but from the inner qualities one possesses.

Does parental permissiveness affect children's development?

Arguments

1. The excessive pennissiveness of present-day parents is doing more harm than good to children and society as well.
2. Children should develop the habit of working and living independently and, meanwhile, practise the virtue of being filial to their parents.
3. Children who have a surfeit of happiness in their childhood often emerge like stodgy puddings and fail to make a success of life.
4. The fact that young people nowadays are self-centred, indifferent and inconsiderate of others is largely the outcome of parental permissiveness in their childhood.
5. Parental authority in a family helps a child to develop his character healthily.
6. Parents should exercise strict discipline over their children because, the more permissive the parents are, the more rebellious against their parents the children will become.
7. Lavish care and excessive permissiveness will only give rise to hedonism among the younger generation.
8. If one lets the child do whatever he wants to, he will ruin the child for life.
9. We have to admit the fact that we now have got a generation of spoilt, selfcentred brats with no respect for their elders.
10. The spread of juvenile delinquency in our age is largely due to parental pennissiveness.

Counter-argmnents

1. More care for children is not the same as permissiveness to them.
2. The truth is that parents nowadays do not take enough care of their children and often neglect their development because the parents are only interested in their careers.
3. Parents are not at all permissive to their children. Violence often takes place in families in which children are abused.
4. Only a relaxed family atmosphere can help the physical and psychological growth of children.
5. To let children do what they like contributes to their independence and competence in their adult lives.
6. It is unfair to blame parents for the spread of juvenile delinquency. There are a lot of other causes involved.
7. Many cases show that children leave home and become members of street gangs just because they can not bear authoritarian control over them by their parents.
8. Strict discipline does not always work in terms of developing children's personal qualities. Too much pressure on children leads to rebellion and other extreme actions.
9. Parents are not justified in using violence to keep discipline and maintain their authority over the children.
10. Children are human beings, too. They need to be protected instead of being frequently scolded or physically abused.

Does television play a positive or negative role in the modern world?

Arguments

1. Television is now playing a very important part in our lives.
2. Television is not only a convenient source of entertainment, but also a comparatively cheap one.
3. Television keeps one informed about current events, allows one to follow the latest developments in science and politics and offers an endless series of programmes which are both instructive and entertaining.
4. A lot of television programmes introduce people to things they have never thought or heard of before.
5. Television has been good company to those who do not work, like housewives, lonely old people, etc.
6. Television provides enormous possibilities for education, like school programmes via closed-circuit television.
7. Television provides special broadcasts for those in TV university, or open university. It also offers specialised subjects like language teaching, sewing, cooking, painting, cosmetology, etc.
8. Television does the job of education in the broadest sense. Instructive pmgrammes achieve their goal through entertaining the viewers.
9. Compared with the radio, everything on television is more lifelike, vivid, and real.
10. Television may be a vital factor in holding a family together where there are, for example, economic problems and husband and wife seem at breaking point.

Counter-arguments

1. Television is a great time-waster.
2. Television makes the viewer completely passive because everything is presented to him without any effort on his part.
3. Television is to blame for the fact that children take longer to learn to read these days and barely see the point at all of acquiring the skill.
4. Television takes up too much of our time. We no longer have enough time for hobbies, entertaining activities, and other outside amusements like theatres, cinemas, sports, etc.
5. People rush home, gulp their food, which is often as simple as sandwich and a glass of beer, and start watching the TV programmes.
6. The monster, i.e. television, demands absolute silence and attention. No one dares to open his mouth during a programme.
7. People have grown addicted to television, often neglecting the necessary and more important things like meals, sleep and even work.
8. A lot of parents use television as a pacifier for their children. They put their children in front of the set and don't care whether the children are exposed to rubbishy commercials or spectacles of violence as long as the children are quiet.
9. What the viewer receives from television is nothing but second-hand experience. He is completely cut off from the real world.
10. Television prevents people from communicating with each other. It has done a lot of harm to the relationship between family members.

Does the younger generation know best?

Arguments

1. The young are better educated and more broad-minded.
2. The young enjoy a lot more things than the old: they have money to spend; they are less dependent on their parents; they grow up more quickly; and they enjoy more freedom.
3. The young question the values and assumptions of the older generation and they are right.
4. The young enjoy more freedom and have a stronger sense of responsibility.
5. The old tend to settle differences by conventional politics and violence.
6. Some old people do not have noble ambitions and only strive for material possessions.
7. The old are unable to keep away from the rat race, in which they have lost touch with the most important things in life.
8. The old can learn from the young. Young people are more devoted to their friends.
9. The young know how to enjoy work and leisure and not to be inhibited.
10. The young live in the present rather than in the past or future.

Counter-arguments

1. The young do not assume their responsibility; they evade it.
2. The young have too much money and they are spoiled.
3. The young are only interested in themselves.
4. The young seek material possessions like clothing, cars, etc. They do not wish to work for them.
5. The young should feel grateful to the older generation, who have created a good life for them.
6. The old provide the young with a good education and money to spe12
7. The older generation fought in the two world wars. They faced real problems, but the young have an easier life.
8. Young people have too much freedom and have no sense of morality.
9. The older generation is too kind and soft with the young. A tougher policy is needed and might work wonders.
10. Young people's outlook on the world is very bleak and they are sceptical of everything.

Is it a good idea to control the world's population growth?

Arguments

1. In modern times, a family with few children, or even with no children at all, is still a happy family.
2. With fewer children in a family, parents spend less time on household chores and concentrate more on their own interests, and their children enjoy better material and educational opportunities than those in bigger families.
3. The most pressing problem created by the rapid increase in population is a shortage of food. At present a large proportion of the existing population is not getting enough of the right kind of food.
4. The rapid rise in world population is creating problems for all countries on earth because there simply aren't enough resources.
5. Both rich and poor countries of the world should take united action to deal with the population explosion. Otherwise, there will be more people fighting for less land and fewer resources, and the future will bring poverty, misery and war to us all.
6. Population increase in developing countries has wiped out the material benefits that they have achieved.
7. Statistics show that where the population rate is high, people's living standards are Jow. This means, people's living conditions cannot improve unless there is a reduction in the increased rate of population.
8. Overpopulation creates a shortage of schools, teachers, hospitals and doctors.
9. Overpopulation causes problems in housing and employment, especially in cities.
10. Just imagine how much better life would be if the world population were cut by half!

Counter-arguments

1. People in agricultural areas need more children to help them with the work in the fields.
2. Whether to have children or not is a private matter and nobody should interfere with it.
3. It is unfair to blame all the problems on the increase in population. It is those greedy manufacturers and businessmen in developed countries that make the heaviest demands on the world's resources and cause the most pollution.
4. If population control were a must, it should be carried out in developed countries as well because a baby born in USA will use in his lifetime 30 times more of the world's resources than a baby born in India.
5. Children are the most important in life. With fewer children around, life will be dull, meaningless and unhappy. It is incredible for a couple to have no children at all.
6. Children in a family give the parents a sense of responsibihty and pride. They are very important to the stability of a family.
7. Population control does greater harm than we realize. For instance, if the one-child pohcy is still in practice in 100 years, people then will have little idea of kinship~ ties, for most of them will have no brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, or cousins.
8. With the govermnent's family planning policy in operation we now have a generation of "only child" families: most of them are arrogant, selfish, and spoilt.
9. A big family offers children a chance to learn how to cope with and care for other people.
10. Children in big families have the chance to compete with each other, in terms of their manners at home, their study at school, their performance at their place of work, etc. Older children usually have a great influence on the younger one.

Is it good for students to have part-time jobs?

Arguments

1. It's good for students to have part-time jobs because this helps cultivate independence among young people.
2. Part-time jobs in business can foster a sense of competition, which is important for students in the future.
3. Being able to earn their own money gives students a feeling that they've become adults and, therefore, makes them feel more mature.
4. Part-time jobs make students more confident in themselves because through the work they can realize their own value and prove that they are capable people.
5. Part-time job experience gives students an insight into what work is about and prepares them psychologically for their future jobs.
6. After-school work teaches students how hard it is to earn money and helps develop thriftiness in our younger generation.
7. Part-time jobs can help students apply their knowledge in practice, and, in return, their experience will make them know better what they have learned in classes and books.
8. Part-time jobs give students a feeling of achievement through contributing to national construction.
9. Students' part-time jobs eontribnte a lot, in one way or another, to our socialist construction.
10. Students who have part-time jobs can relieve, to some extent, the economic burdens of their parents.

Counter-arguments

1. Part-time jobs often distract students' attention from their studies, and some students even play truant.
2. The main task of students is to study hard and learn what is needed for the development of our nation. Social experience can be gained later after they finish their studies.
3. It's not good for students to do part-time jobs because they will become money-oriented.
4. Many students who have part-time jobs have shown a decline in their studies.
5. Part-time jobs do not help develop a sense of thriftiness among young people because many students spend the money on such high-priced items and luxuries that their parents can hardly afford.
6. Since students are in their formative years, part-time jobs may expose them to social ills at an age when they cannot differentiate good from bad.
7. Some students become juvenile delinquents because they come under the influence of bad people through part-time jobs.
8. Though students who have part-time jobs may relieve their parents' economic burdens, their early contact with society adds greatly to the worries of their parents.
9. Though some after-school work can help students practise what they learn in classes, many of the jobs require nothing of the students' knowledge.
10. Some students have become dropouts because through part-time jobs they've found that the more education you have, the Jess money you make.

Is it good to live in a large modern city?

Arguments

1. Most people love cities and many are flocking there from the country.
2. Modern man is too sophisticated for simple country pleasures.
3. It is enough to visit the countryside at weekends.
4. Commuting does not really affect those who live in cities; it is only a small inconvenience.
5. People easily adapt themselves to city life; noise and traffic are hardly noticeable.
6. There are many reasons why city life is preferable: there are more places for entertainment, etc.
7. There are better schools and services in big cities.
8. There are more chances of employment. The range of jobs is greater and the pay is higher.
9. There is more opportunity to succeed in life.
10. The educational level is higher; it is a better place for children.

Counter-arguments

1. Large modern cities are too big to control.
2. Commuting stretches man's resources to the utmost.
3. Cit123wellers adopt a wholly unnatural way of life. They lose touch with the land and the rhythm of nature. They are barely conscious of seasons. Flowers, leaves, the changes of season become irrelevant in their lives.
4. Rents are high; buying a house is impossible for average people.
5. Cities breed crime and violence; houses are often burgled.
6. Tension in big cities shortens people's lives.
7. People lose too much time in getting to work.
8. In big cities there are not enough public toilets.
9. Pollution in big cities is becoming more and more serious.
10. City people are not as warm-hearted and friendly as country people.

Is it necessary to develop tourism?

Arguments

1. It is necessary to develop the tourist trade, for it contributes a lot to increasing understanding between nations.
2. As the saying goes, "Seeing is believing." Only a trip to an unfamiliar land can help us understand the people and culture there.
3. Since tourism helps increase understanding between people, it will finally wipe out prejudice against other nations, and make the world a more peaceful one.
4. Tourism contributes significantly to many countries' GNP(Gross National Product). The economy of some nations is based on the tourist industry.
5. Tourism helps develop a nation's commerce because tourists are most likely to buy souvenirs wherever they go.
6. Tourism provides jobs for many people and helps solve or ease the social problem of unemployment.
7. Tourism helps accelerate a city's construction and its embellishment.
8. Contact with tourists from 123r widens the horizon of the local people.
9. The tourist trade gives people a chance to enjoy the beautiful scenery of the word and the wonders of manki12
10. Tourism will help people learn about different cultures of the world.

Counter-arguments

1. Tourism cannot increase understanding between nations because tourists are often trapped in big hotels and only gaze at the natives from a distance.
2. Tourism does not wipe out prejudice, but leads to the persistence of national stereotypes because when travelling, you notice only characteristics which confirm your preconceptions.
3. It is true that foreign friends can make people understand stereotypes are absurd and harnffnl, but the tourist trade prevents people from making foreign friends.
4. Since tourists do not have time to mix with the local people, they cannot have a full view of the local culture.
5. Tourism makes some parts of the word too crowded a place to live in.
6. Tourism creates pollution and has destroyed many beautiful scenic spots.
7. Tourists cannot have a full enjoyment of the b