Should foreigners pay more? (short)

Posted on June 11, 2011 by Mr Writefix

In many places, foreign visitors are charged more than locals when they visit cultural or tourist attractions. Do you agree or disagree with this?

Tourist attractions often have two admission prices: one for locals or residents, and one for foreigners or visitors from far away. Some see this as discrimination, while others accept it as being fair. In this essay I will say why I think it is reasonable for foreign visitors to pay more.

I don’t think locals should pay the same as foreign tourists. For one thing, a historical attraction in my country is part of my heritage. My ancestors built it, and I should have free or cheap access so I can know my history. Second, let’s face it : most tourists are rich – or at least richer than us locals. If they can afford to fly from Australia or China to see a castle or a rare animal, than they can pay a few dollars more. In addition, I pay taxes in my country, so I have already paid a lot more from my salary than the foreign tourist who is only here for a few days.

I think foreigners should pay more for several reasons. First of all, it raises money to maintain the attraction. The higher admission fees from foreigners are important in Egypt or Mexico to preserve world-class historical sites. Secondly, tourists pay far more for their flights, hotels, and cocktails. A few dollars extra to visit a museum is nothing. Third, most tourists only visit the attraction once in their lives. Who is not prepared to pay a little extra for a special occasion?

To sum up, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for me to pay a little extra when I am in a new country, and vice versa. In fact, I’ve already started to save for my next trip!

Should foreigners pay more? (long)

Posted on June 7, 2011 by Mr Writefix

In many places, foreign visitors are charged more than locals when they visit cultural or tourist attractions. Do you agree or disagree with this?

To visit the beautiful and remote mountain kingdom of Bhutan, foreigners (everyone without a Bhutanese or an Indian passport) have to pay up to $240 a day. This is an extreme example of charging visitors more than locals, but the country has many valid reasons for this policy. In this essay, I will say why I generally agree with foreigners paying more to visit cultural or historical sites.

It’s easy to see why some foreign visitors resent being charged more. First of all, nobody likes to pay more than other people for the same thing. It’s irritating to know that the person beside you in a queue or at a tourist attraction has paid much less just because of his or her nationality. A second annoying point is that you often don’t get any better service just because you have paid more to enter a historical site or entertainment venue. In fact, the place is often overcrowded with locals and your visit can suffer. Furthermore, knowing that you as a foreign visitor are paying more often makes you bad-tempered and therefore less likely to enjoy the experience. Finally, some think that places such as Cambodia’s Angkor Wat or Ireland’s Cliffs of Moher are world cultural or natural treasures and should be open to everyone. They are not the property of some money-grabbing ministry.

However, there are good reasons why overseas visitors should pay more. For one thing, foreign tourism is still a privilege of the well-off. Why should countries not charge rich visitors as much as the market will bear? Nobody is forced to visit these places. Second, the attraction or cultural site is part of the local community’s history and heritage. They should not have to pay to learn about their own history. A third point is that it is extremely expensive to maintain places like Istanbul’s Topkapi palace. Tourists who may be visiting once in a lifetime can and should contribute to the cost of maintenance. In fact, this is the most important point: if you have dreamed all your life of visiting Peru’s Machu Picchu or China’s Terracotta Army then surely you are ready to spend a little more for this experience.

In conclusion, we need to put things in perspective. The admission fees rarely add much to the cost of our visit, compared to hotels or travel, and we as foreign travelers help maintain and preserve the site for the locals and for future generations.

Travel and international understanding

Posted on May 17, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Does travel help to promote understanding and communication between countries?

Most people would agree that travel broadens the mind. Surely, visiting new places and meeting new people helps us to understand how others live? However, the history of travel has taught us that many misunderstandings and tragedies can occur when different societies meet. In this essay, I will discuss whether travel contributes to mutual respect and understanding.

The issue is probably not travel itself, but the purpose of travel. There are many motivations for travel. It can be to learn, as in a religious pilgrimage, a personal journey, or an expedition. Millions of Muslims meet on Haj each year, and are reminded of the scale and diversity of the faith. Exploration of remote jungles or islands has given us an appreciation of cultures very different from ours. Even the modern traveler, flying in hours from China to Australia or from France to Thailand, glimpses different ways of life and different histories.

However, travel is not always so innocent. Trade, for example, can begin as an equal exchange of crafts or commodities between small groups of traders, but it can also become the basis for massive exploitation, colonization or even extermination. If one group believes its cultural values, religion, or society are superior to the other’s, then friction or resentment can grow into conflict. And too often, travel is undertaken with no desire to meet or learn from the host country’s people: it is simply a change of scene or temperature. Such travel actually sets out to minimize all contact with the culture of the host country and instead surrounds itself with the food, drink and entertainment of its own.

In conclusion, while it might seem that travel can contribute to understanding, it depends on the intention of the traveler and the attitude of the host. Just because travel is easier than ever before does not mean we should bring our prejudices with us on the plane.

You can also find another essay on this topic on the external website www.urch.com

Traffic: What can we do?

Posted on April 23, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Nowadays traffic in major cities is worsening. What problems does it create? How can we help solve these problems as individuals?

As more and more people move from the countryside into the world’s cities, traffic is becoming a bigger and bigger problem. Public transport is unable to cope, and people turn to private transport, often making the situation worse. In this essay, I will suggest ways in which individuals can take the lead in improving the flow of traffic in our cities.

It may seem as if there is nothing the individual can do to solve traffic problems. Investing in public transport such as the construction of a metro, railway or tram system, or even introducing a bus network is far too expensive for the ordinary individual. Even calling on local authorities or politicians to begin such projects is usually very unrewarding because of the long timescales involved. Finally, buying your own car or motorbike just adds to the overcrowding and magnifies the traffic problem.

However, there are some steps ordinary individuals can take. First of all, where possible we should opt for public transport, such as buses, trains, or even taxis, rather than using cars. These are a more efficient use of limited urban space than private vehicles. Another option is to pool: to share our cars with other people going to the same work or school. The fewer vehicles on the road, the less congestion. A third approach is to live closer to where we work, so that we can walk or cycle. It is much less stressful to know that you can reach your work within a few minutes by the simplest forms of transport. Finally, we do need to work with local politicians and urban planners to provide transport services. If they are not constantly pressed, they will spend the money elsewhere.

In conclusion, although traffic may seem like an insurmountable problem, it is simply the result of many individual choices. It is pointless waiting for governments to take action – we must take some responsibility ourselves.

Does cheap air travel damage the environment?

Posted on April 19, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Some people say cheap air travel is good because it enables ordinary people to travel, while others argue that it is bad for the environment. Discuss both views, and include your opinion.

In the past air travel was only for the elite – the rich, the powerful, the privileged. Today, hundreds of millions of people are able to travel around the world for work or pleasure. As Air Asia’s slogan puts it: “Now everyone can fly.” However, the price to be paid for this easier travel may be damage to the environment. In this essay, I will examine some of the arguments for and against cheap air travel.

There are plenty of accusations against cheap flights. Critics of budget air travel claim that the emissions from jet fuel are damaging the atmosphere. This is particularly serious at the higher levels of the atmosphere where modern jets fly. A single short flight from Dubai to Mumbai can produce as much carbon dioxide as one month’s driving for a family. The environmental cost continues when the tourists land, as hotels, leisure and other facilities are very significant polluters and consume a lot of resources. A third point of course is that this travel is mostly ‘unnecessary’ and people would simply stay at home if the flights were not so cheap.

However, the proponents of cheap air travel, such as Ireland’s Michael O’Leary, have their own powerful counterclaims. First, they reject the allegation that jets contribute significantly to global warming. They point out that modern jets are much quieter and much more fuel-efficient than in the past. Secondly, many countries already have carbon taxes or levies included in the price of the airline ticket or aviation fuel. This can offset the carbon produced during the flight. In addition, most of the arguments against cheap flights are based on the belief that it is acceptable for certain people to fly, but not for ordinary people. In other words, the wealthy or powerful would like to deprive ordinary people of the right to travel, to see new places and meet new people.

In conclusion, cheap air travel is not a clear-cut issue, but a political, economic and environmental minefield. In my opinion, everyone should have the opportunity to travel, but we do need some monitoring of the effect on the environment, both in the air and on the ground.

Writefix.com

Argument essays, graphs, other writing, and speaking for IELTS, PET, and TOEFL

Category: Travel

Should foreigners pay more? (short)

Related Posts:

Should foreigners pay more? (long)

Related Posts:

Travel and international understanding

Related Posts:

Traffic: What can we do?

Related Posts:

Does cheap air travel damage the environment?

Related Posts: