Young people and free time

Posted on October 3, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Young people today have a lot of free time. In your opinion, do they use this time well or do they waste it?

Do young people today use their free wisely? Or do many of them just waste it doing pointless activities? In this essay, I will discuss how most of the young people I know spend their free time.

Of course, many young people, just like many old people, waste their time. Some youngsters choose to sleep instead of getting up and being active. They get used to being lazy and the slightest effort is too much. Others are more active, but prefer to spend all their time in the mall or in the coffee shop, just watching girls or chatting with their friends. This if fine for a while, but it’s not very productive. Still others of course never leave the house and just sit around chatting on the internet or watching sports on television. It’s a lot easier to just sit at home and criticize your team than to get fit and take part, but that’s what many people prefer to do.

However, there are also many young people who are extremely active and productive. After all, most sport is played by young people, and stadiums are full of people supporting their favorite teams. Secondly, most young people are trying to create a good future for themselves. A lot of young people do extra courses or spend their time reading in order to do better in their studies. But the most important point is that young people are not very different from older people. Sometimes we all spend too long doing one thing, when we should try to have a balanced range of activities. All of us need to relax and have fun, and all of us, young and old, need to try new things and meet with friends and family.

In conclusion, it’s not really a question of age. Old and young people can choose to use their time well or to fritter it away. Hopefully we can all make choices that benefit us in the long run.

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.

More sports & fitness centers?

Posted on June 6, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Would the availability of more sports facilities lead to better public health?

It would seem obvious that providing more sports facilities would lead to increased fitness and better health among the population. However, there are also several reasons why public health might not improve. In this essay, I will explain why access to sports facilities may not be sufficient to improve our health.

More gyms, stadiums, and fitness centers would certainly be a good thing. First of all, people will not use sports facilities if they are not convenient. After a long day working or taking care of a family, nobody wants to spend a long time driving or commuting to a gym or to swim or play tennis. The closer the facility, the more likely people are to use it. Secondly, having facilities in neighborhoods will encourage friends and families to exercise or play sport together. Playing a sport or getting fit can be more enjoyable with people you know. A third point is that just having sports centers available increases awareness of fitness and health, and this can motivate and encourage people who might not normally use them to join.

However, just having more sports facilities may not be enough. First, the facilities may be too expensive, both to use and to build. Massive stadiums costing governments hundreds of millions of dollars may only serve a few people, and ordinary people may not be able to afford gym or spa fees. Another issue is the need to support people with training, diets, professional sports coaching and goal-setting. Without good organization and professional staffing, many people may visit sports facilities just a few times and give up or do something else more fun. However, the most important thing is changing the mindset of people. Children do what their parents do, and parents do what their friends do. If they are not interested in fitness or sports, the facilities will be underused and a waste of money. Until money is spent on education, people may prefer to play computer games or sit around eating unhealthy food, drinking and smoking.

In conclusion, while I think every school, village and town needs sports facilities, I don’t think that real change can result from just building more sports centers. We need a two-pronged approach which motivates us and our children to become more active and which is affordable and accessible.

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.

Does tourism benefit a country?

Posted on April 19, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Tourism is big business. However, are there hidden costs, and does tourism always benefit a country?

Every year, millions of people travel to other countries for vacations, spending billions of dollars. This tourism can create jobs and improve lives, or it can lead to problems. In this essay, I will describe some of the effects of tourism and say why I think it is useful.

Tourism can have some benefits. One advantage is that it creates jobs. Work is available in hotels, restaurants, travel businesses, taxis, entertainment centers resorts and many other places which serve tourists. Secondly, tourism can increase awareness of culture. Foreigners who visit the UAE can learn about the Emirati culture and tradition and religion, and vice versa. Finally, tourism can lead to a better environment. The government will clean the streets and try to reduce pollution.

However, tourism can lead to many problems. First of all the income from tourism is not reliable. For example, last month in Egypt, there were some political problems, and suddenly it affected the tourism dramatically, which is very important for the economy. A second point is that the jobs from tourism are poorly paid. People working as waiters or cleaners do not receive high salaries. However, the most important point is that tourism can lead to problems such as lack of respect for the local culture, or even problems such as alcohol or prostitution.

In conclusion, tourism can have good or bad effects on the environment, the economy or even the culture. In my opinion people should enjoy travelling and visiting new places, but they should be careful to respect the local people and places.

Should dangerous sports such as motor-racing or boxing be banned?

Posted on April 11, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Across the world, millions of people enjoy watching or even taking part in sports such as boxing, wrestling, mountain climbing, bungee jumping and a whole range of other hazardous sports. However, others think that these sports should be strictly controlled or even banned completely. In this essay I will describe why I think it is a mistake to ban dangerous sports, and why people should be able to enjoy the sports they want.

It can be hard to understand why people like dangerous sports so much. In boxing, for example, many people are killed or suffer brain injury every year. Mohammed Ali, one of the most famous boxers of all time, has severe medical problems even as a result of boxing. In addition, some people do not understand why blood and danger is so important. They wonder why boxers need to hit each other or why Formula 1 racers have to crash or risk serious injury in order for other people to enjoy this sport. A third point is that sport is now a big business. Companies, television stations, and sponsors spend a large amount of money on these sports instead of safer alternatives such as swimming or running.

However there are many reasons why people should be allowed to do whatever sport they want. For one thing, even if something is forbidden, people will still try to find a way to do it. The sport will go underground, like cock-fighting in most European countries. Secondly, there is almost no activity which does not have some danger. For example, swimming, running and even walking can all result in injury. But the main reason is that people will always be attracted to sports where they can move faster or go further. Even the motto of the Olympics is ‘Citius, Altius, Fortius,’ Latin for ‘Faster, Higher, Stronger.’ It is part of human nature, and sportsmen and sportswomen are aware of the risk in their sport.

In conclusion, while there are some understandable reasons for worrying about danger in sport, I believe people should be free to watch and participate in whatever sport they want. What we need to do is to ensure that personal safety of the players or athletes is not in danger, and to encourage more people to push themselves and take part so that they can enjoy these activities.

Writefix.com

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

Category: Sports and Leisure

Young people and free time

Related Posts:

Should foreigners pay more? (long)

Related Posts:

More sports & fitness centers?

Related Posts:

Does cheap air travel damage the environment?

Related Posts:

Does tourism benefit a country?

Related Posts:

Should dangerous sports such as motor-racing or boxing be banned?

Related Posts: