The government should spend more money on public facilities rather than on artists or artistic projects. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Government sponsorship for arts is a controversial issue, especially when the state is confronted with budget problems. Those who object to public funds for arts believe that money should be diverted to the construction of public facilities. I am of the opinion that the government should take citizens’ benefits into consideration and adjust the spending on art or infrastructures accordingly.
It is first important to realize that art is an essential component of cultural legacy, so the protection and development of art has important implications to cultural diversity. In terms of painting, for example, styles, genres, tool and materials differ from culture to culture. An art form is likely to disappear, if it is not well protected. Besides, some works of art such as graffiti, spark people’s imagination and provide them with a novel perspective to view the world. Art can develop a culture in which people pursue it as a hobby. Furthermore, public art boosts the appeal of the built environment, which is reflected in the diversity of architecture and landscaping.
Despite the importance of art, public facilities deserve more of government spending than art. Citizens are more interested in the availability of public facilities, as water and electricity supply, schools, libraries and roads, which have a direct impact on their daily lives. By contrast, for most people, sculptures, paintings or operas are luxury items, which cannot bring any tangible benefit to them. Another reason is that the art can sometimes yield high returns and therefore succeed in receiving business sponsorship. This is particularly the case when the arts include music, movies, operas and creative arts. Therefore, it is pointless to support the use of public funds for this purpose, if basic facilities are underfunded.
In the light of the facts outlined above, government investment in the arts is essential to
cultural diversity, the development of personal hobbies and the visual appeal of the built environment. However, in those countries whose infrastructure is inadequate, government funding for the arts may have to be reduced.
Instead of asking the government to bear the cost of higher education, students should pay tuition fees themselves. Do you agree or disagree?
The government has long been the major funds of university education. Those people who support government spending on education think that some students do not enroll because of learning costs. My view is that students’ personal situations should be considered, before the government decides whether to offer free education.
It is worth noting that university education is the key to closing/bridging the income gap. There are numerous students, especially those from low income families, who cannot afford educational expenses. For example, students who study law or medical science may spend many years in the university, making university education an expensive option to them. Because of financial constraints, people of low socio-economic status are at a disadvantage in terms of educational opportunities and career development. By contrast, children of higher socioeconomic status are more likely to advance their education and find well-paid jobs eventually. As a consequence, the widening income gap may add uncertainty to social stability.
Higher participation rates in tertiary education are also vital to economic and social development, because productivity will be improved and citizens’ morals will be strengthened. Even though government sponsorship can inspire people to receive tertiary education, it can also cause the waste of public resources. Free education may be a reason why many students are reluctant to complete their courses and enter the workforce at the earliest date. It not only adds/imposes a burden on the country but also affects state funding for other sectors, such as
primary and secondary education.Let alone students’ contribution allows universities to upgrade facilities and recruit well-qualified lecturers, both important to students’ academic achievement.
To summarize, the government should provide financial support according to students’ needs to ensure that they have access to education. However, tuition fees are applicable to most students, especially those from middle to high income families, as it helps maintain the quality of tertiary education.
Economic progress is one way to measure the success of one country, while some people think that there are other factors. What other factors should be considered? Among these factors, do you think that any factor is more important than the others?
The rapid growth of emerging economies has fuelled controversy over how to define successful countries. Regarding the distinguishing features of successful countries, people might have some shared opinions but they do not reach any agreement. I think that besides economic development, other factors should be taken into consideration.
Firstly, social welfare is a significant factor, which has relevance to people’s satisfaction with life. There is ample evidence that in many developing countries, poor people do not benefit from economic growth, which is reflected in the widening gap between haves and have-nots. National wealth is not distributed evenly, as the health care service and the education system are underfunded. Among other problems, the ever-increasing cost of living and the escalating class conflict are particularly pronounced. It is also important to realize that the economic development of some countries is achieved at environment’s expenses. This has a destructive effect on the natural environment and causes the spread of different diseases.
Considering these factors, economic growth should not be regarded as the main criterion for
measuring a country’s success. There is a growing recognition that a successful country can ensure the fair distribution of wealth so citizens’ needs can be satisfied. People are able to acquire necessities such as food, housing, education, medical care and so forth at affordable prices. In deciding whether a country is livable, it is also important to consider air quality, access to clean water, waste disposal, sewage management and transport infrastructure. In addition, we must take into account the issue of whether or not the economic development is sustainable, namely, whether the country can provide adequate resources to feed future generations.
In brief, it is premature to equate wealth with success. Living standards and sustainable development are among those factors that can be taken into consideration when a country’s success is evaluated.
It is argued that we are living in a throw-away society: people throw away what they use in daily life, instead of recycling or reusing them. Why has this happened and how to address this issue?
The past decade has seen a marked increase in the public’s awareness of environmental issue. The environmental impact of the use and disposal of consumer goods has become a cause for concern. It is important to focus on how this problem has happened and how to solve this problem.
The main reason behind the increased consumption of products lies in the fact that people have higher income. The improvement of productivity, as well as technological innovation, has reduced the cost of production substantially, so products, including packaged foods and household products, are increasingly affordable. Moreover, people’s fast pace of life accounts for their dependence on disposable products. The lifespan of durable products (such as mobile phones and computers) has been shortened, in large part due to the fact that these products are renewed rapidly. Furthermore, consumers are indifferent to the consequences of their behavior. The
continuously growing demand for products results in enormous energy consumption as well as a substantial increase in waste and pollution.
As the overconsumption of products is pervasive, it is important to take some measures to mitigate pollution. One main strategy is the use of bio-degraded materials, which can reduce the damage caused by plastic bags, packages and metals to the environment. In addition, emphasis should be placed on people’s environmental awareness, as it changes the ways in which people use and dispose of products. For example, people should be encouraged to keep old products, as long as these products function appropriately. Environmental groups should disseminate the knowledge of how to recycle disposable goods and household appliances.
In conclusion, people’s attitude toward consumption and the increase in disposable income are main reasons behind excessive consumption of disposable items. To address this problem successfully, the top priority is to raise people’s awareness of environmental protection, which can lead to a change to their lifestyles.
Volunteer work organized by middle schools brings more benefits than problems. To whatextent do you agree or disagree?
Volunteer work has widely been promoted in many schools and even recognized as a requirement for a graduation. Despite the fact that volunteer work has its downside, it is beneficial for participants and the community as a whole. It is clear that students can improve their skills and enrich their social experience by participating in community service.
When providing community service, students will encounter numerous problemsand challenges which are rare at school, such as how to introduce community service to the elderly and how to assist children in schooling. Volunteer work enables students to boost their confidence and
improve problem-solving abilities, although they are sometimes not aware of this benefit. A second benefit is that students can integrate their academic experience with their practical experience. It comes as no surprise that many employers now express strong interest in those graduates with volunteer experience. The increase in the number of young volunteers is also of benefit to the community. Some services, such as those that aim to help the homeless, often have financial problems, which can be solved if young volunteers are involved. It can also raise the awareness of some social problems (such as environmental issues and animal rights) among people, especially young people. In a society where people are willing to help each other, people have a sense of belonging, which is crucial to community cohesion.
The value of volunteer work is sometimes discounted by its deficiencies. We cannot rule out the possibility that community service is not well-planned so it can lead to the overuse of volunteers’ time and energy. Another problem is the lack of flexibility, which makes volunteer work tedious and strenuous rather than stimulating and educational. Volunteers are not devoted to the service, possibly because the value of their labour is not explicit.
The discussion of these factors leads to the conclusion that we should recognize the importance of volunteer work for students’ abilities, career prospects and social development. In order to rally support for volunteer work, volunteer service organizations should tailor these services to meet vounterrs’ needs.
News has a remarkable influence on people’s opinions and ideas, do you think it is a positive or negative change?
We are bombarded with the information presented by the news media, including newspaper, radio, television and the Internet. There is a growing recognition that news is important in forming and affecting public opinion. From a personal point of view, the undue influence of the news media
is a challenge to society.
More often than not, news magnifies the effect of some events, spreading anxiety throughout society. It is customary for the news media to exaggerate the magnitude of some crises or threats (such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters, serial murders and financial crises) in an attempt to attract intended viewers and raise viewing rates. This will lead to viewer’ overreaction and mood swings as they will tend to believe that they are under threat constantly. Their feelings will be strong if these events occur in the vicinity. Not only does it affect their wellbeing but it also erodes their confidence in interpersonal relationships.
News can also cultivate and affect one’s attitudes towards some people or events but fail to offer an insight into the truth in all cases. In choosing newsworthy events, news agencies show a preference for those events that live up to viewers’ expectations and support their notions. For example, media coverage of crime will reinforce stereotypes about some social groups, such as minority ethnic groups, because news reports increase these people’s representation intentionally. Many news agencies obtain financial sponsorship from political parties or for-profit organizations, so they present some biased information to affect people’s opinions. There are numerous examples that illustrate this point. Some drug companies describe their products as major breakthroughs in the news media, in an effort to convince people that their products are safe rather than hazardous. It is fair to say that news causes people to form misconceptions and make unwise decisions.
My concluding remark is that it is not a boon if news permeates our lives. Apart from our understanding of the world, news can have a profound impact on our behavior.
A longer prison term as a way of punishing those who break the law is not as good as other methods. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Imposing sentences is considered as a method to punish those who commit a serious offence and sometimes as a correctional method. However, we sometimes note that the crime rate is soaring, despite the fact that the number of prisons is growing. In the discussion of pros and cons of imprisonment, we need to consider the severity of the offense, the age of the offender and the impact on the public.
The supporters of stiff sentences believe that this kind of punishment has a deterrent effect on both prospective offenders and habitual offenders. The logic behind this idea is that imprisonment means a loss of freedom, a consequence that no rational person is willing to take. This is particularly true when it has an impact on their lives, including their career. For habitual criminals or those who commit serious crimes, a harsh sentence is also reasonable, because it can protect social order. It is difficult to convince people that a serial killer poses no threat to the public. When we oppose imprisonment, we
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容