Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Short)

Posted on November 28, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Some say that economic development is the solution to poverty: others say it is the cause of poverty. What is your opinion?

Many people today have clean water, good food, comfortable houses and money to spend. Billions, however, live in terrible conditions, often without enough to eat. Why is it that, despite all our economic progress, so many people is poor? In this essay I will discuss if the growth of business and capitalism is keeping people in poverty.

It’s easy to blame economic development for many problems. First of all, huge companies exploit the natural resources of countries. Nigeria’s oil, Zimbabwe’s diamonds and the Brazilian forest are used up, but no money goes to the ordinary people. Second, much industry leads to pollution or environmental damage. Huge dam projects in India force people from their homes, and pesticide poisoning kills millions. In addition, companies don’t care about employees. Some even move overnight to different countries, leaving thousands unemployed.

But it’s impossible to turn the clock back and live without economic development. In the first place, any job is better than no job. People need money to buy food, build houses and pay for their children’s medicine. Second, business and trade mean that good governments have money to invest in better infrastructure. They can build better roads, hospitals, sanitation, and schools, thus attracting more development. Finally, large-scale production provides us with cheap clothes, food, electronic goods and other luxuries. Only free trade and open markets can give us this consumer lifestyle, for necessities as well as luxuries.

In summary, we need to balance the greed of corporations with the needs of our people. Everyone deserves a chance to live a comfortable and dignified life.

258 words (The information below is incorrect)

Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Long)

Posted on November 28, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Some say that economic development is the solution to poverty: others say it is the cause of poverty. What is your opinion?

Despite levels of wealth one side and development unparalleled in history, billions of people on our planet are still uneducated, poorly housed Other side, sick, inadequately fed or even starving as a result of poverty. Is this a result of economic development, or can a rising tide of economic development give all humans a basic standard and dignity of life? In this essay, I will ask if economic progress is only for one group Thesis: what the essay will do in our society.

It’s important to realize that economic activity alone is not enough Topic Sentence: Economic development does not always mean the end of poverty. to end poverty. In many poor countries, natural resources such as copper, oil or even land are being exploited Idea 1: companies are exploiting land and other valuable resources by local or foreign companies but with little benefit for the local people. Nigeria’s oil wealth and Zimbabwe’s diamonds are examples where money leaves the country or does not help the majority. Secondly, economic activity can have devastating consequences on the environment Idea 2:Economic development can mean environmental problems. Dam projects in India or the clearing of the rainforest can mean local people lose land and livelihoods. Furthermore, multinational companies are not tied to any country. Idea 3: multinational companies have no moral obligations to any country. Businesses move overnight and outsource to find even cheaper labor or resources, leaving unemployed people behind them.

However, we can’t go back to a Stone-Age existence Topic sentence: We cannot live without developing our economies of barter and living in huts. More people than ever have access to electricity Idea 1: benefits of development, clean water, good schools, and medicine than ever before. Clothes, electronic luxuries such as phones, televisions and computers are cheap. All these things have come about through business and trade. They have provided income for governments to improve the life of their people. Secondly, other systems have failed: Idea 2: Communism and protectionism have not worked very well when India and China opened their markets and allowed people to do business, millions of people were lifted out of poverty. And even in countries where companies pay low salaries or do not look after the environment, Idea 3: Even a poor salary is better than no salary there are more opportunities for workers. What seems like a sweatshop in China or Mexico may be a first step in building a modern economy.

In conclusion, we can’t live without economic progress. Conclusion One side (Opinion) All that we and our governments can do is try to make sure that it is in the interests of our society and our environment. Conclusion, future or recommendation.

373 words. The info below is not correct.

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.

Effects of ageing on society (long)

Posted on June 5, 2011 by Mr Writefix

In countries such as Japan, the population is getting older. Are the effects of an ageing population positive or negative?

In many countries such as Japan or Russia, the average age of the population is becoming older. Most people think this has a negative effect on a society, but it can also provide some opportunities. In this essay, I will look at some effects of ageing on a country.

When a population gets older, many roles in the society change. First of all, there may be fewer young people to take care of older parents or family. This may cause a breakdown in family relationships. It can also mean that older people need care in nursing homes. There is also an effect on work. Older workers may not want to do hard physical work or to work in poorly paid jobs. This may cause a shortage of workers and the country may have to import foreign workers for these positions. A third effect is on government spending. Instead of spending on schools and colleges, healthcare may become a priority to treat diseases such as cancer, diabetes or heart conditions.

However, not all the effects have to be negative. Although some people claim that older people do not have new ideas, older employees can be extremely productive and efficient and this can help companies to succeed. There may be less crime in the society, since there may be less competition for jobs or other needs. Some people worry that an older society will be more conservative and will be focused on the past. However, this could also mean a more compassionate society which is less focused on material things. Another possible outcome of an ageing society is that there may be people to take care of young children. In addition, children might have a better education if schools and colleges were not as crowded.

In conclusion it’s probably better for a society to have a good equilibrium in which all age groups are balanced. However, we need to be ready for demographic changes in order to provide our citizens, young or old, with the best opportunities.

Effects of ageing on society (short)

Posted on June 5, 2011 by Mr Writefix

In countries such as Japan, the population is getting older. Are the effects of an ageing population positive or negative?

In many countries, the population is getting older. Some people believe that this has negative effects. Other people think it can be positive. In this essay, I will look at the positive and negative impact of ageing.

It is true that there are some disadvantages to an older population. First of all, there may not be enough people to work. The economy will decrease, and the government will have to bring in foreign workers. A second reason is that there will not be enough young people to look after the old people. They might have to go to special homes for old people. A third point is that older people don’t buy many things or spend a lot of money. This will also reduce the economy.

However, there are some advantages to having a lot of older people. First, they have a lot of experience in life and in work. A company with experienced employees will be successful. Older people may also have good viewpoints on life and society and will get on well with others. Another advantage is that old people can teach their grandchildren well. In addition, the schools will not be crowded, and there may be less crime. Older people do not usually steal or fight, and there will also be fewer accidents because they drive more carefully.

In conclusion, older people can contribute extensively to society. However it is best if the society has a balance between the energy of young people and the experience and wisdom of the old.

University: Theory or Practice?

Posted on May 9, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Theoretical subjects such as mathematics, philosophy and economics should be removed from university curricula and replaced with practical subjects such as computer programming and engineering. Do you agree or disagree?

The question of what should or should not be on a university syllabus has always been a contentious one. But suggesting that we make simplistic choices such as removing philosophy and replacing it with engineering is simply ridiculous. In this essay, I will explain why we need to think carefully about forcing our youth into certain college courses.

First of all, universities are not just training centers for companies. Of course the university must remain in contact with the ‘real’ world and provide courses that can be applied to ‘real’ world problems. However, this does not mean that the university’s only function is to provide cheap job-ready recruits for corporations. The real world is not a simple place: it is a multi-dimensional, interwoven web of interests, realities, perspectives and complex social interactions. Perhaps engineers can build a bridge, but they cannot do it by themselves. They need to be politicians, communicators, visionaries, designers, accountants, leaders, and problem-solvers. Similarly philosophers or economists cannot dwell in the clouds concocting grandiose theories: they need to be communicators, writers, breadwinners, accountants, cooks and baby-sitters. We all live in worlds where practice and theory constantly intersect, and our choices of course in college do not mean we are less practical or more theoretical. They simply reflect an area of our interest at a particular point in time.

A second reason why colleges should offer a wide range of courses is in response to market demands. Many colleges depend on tuition fees, and if people want to pay for doctorates in divinity or diplomas in dog-grooming, then the college should respond to this and provide the best courses possible.

Thirdly, imagine a world full of engineers, or philosophers, or food scientists, or economists. Clearly civilization would come to a halt, as would conversation. From time to time gaps will arise in the job market because of new economic or population trends, and colleges will need to produce more doctors, business graduates or nurses, but overall, a healthy society will have a healthy range of courses for its people to maximize its human potential.

However, the most important reason is that people are immensely versatile. An engineer can be a philosopher, and a cook can be an physicist, or a musician, or a day-trader. There is no need to pigeon-hole people and put artificial restrictions on their activities. College should be an opportunity to explore and to connect with the world, rather than a joyless initiation into a lifetime of work. In a world that is changing faster than ever before, we need to forget simplistic distinctions and instead prepare ourselves for a rich, varied lifetime full of opportunities and wonder.

Government spending on art

Posted on April 26, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Some people think that government should support painters, poets, musicians, and other artists financially. Others argue that money should be spent on other, more important, issues. Do you agree or disagree?

Most people like paintings, music, poetry and other forms of art. However, a lot of people also think that governments have more urgent priorities such as housing, hospitals, defense, or water. In this essay, I will discuss whether art should be included in our national budget.

When drawing up its budget, a government has to make tough decisions. First of all, there are basic requirements such as shelter, health, and the protection of the country’s citizens. People need food, medical care, and education before they need music or statues. Secondly, governments tend to focus on short-term needs. They often fail to consider what future generations would need or like to see, and as a result, they minimize spending on museums, galleries or architecture. Another point is that individual politicians may not be very interested in art. They may prefer to spend money on things that will get them re-elected, such as roads or schools.

However, excluding art is a mistake. First, even in tough times, people need music, songs, color, dance, design and other forms of art. These allow people to express themselves and release social and political tension. Furthermore, to include beauty in the design of a building or even a city does not add much to the cost. For a slightly higher cost, even a hospital or a school can be beautiful. Additionally, painting, music, poetry or dance can actually serve a government by expressing a national identity or by attracting tourism.

In conclusion, we should always try to keep some beauty in our life, even if money is tight. If we close off all means of expression, we risk problems for ourselves and our societies.

Do foreign workers benefit the host country? (long)

Posted on April 10, 2011 by Mr Writefix

In many countries, foreign labor is an important part of the economy. Using migrant labor can contribute to the development of a country, but it can also cause economic problems. What are some of the advantages and drawbacks of expatriate labor for a country’s economy?

The development of countries such as Singapore, Brunei, the Gulf countries, and even the US has been helped greatly by millions of foreign workers. While foreign workers are cheap and quick, they can also cause problems for the economy of the country. In this essay I will look at some of the problems caused by an expatriate workforce and suggest that we need a balanced approach to employing foreign workers.

There are many obvious advantages to using foreign labor. First of all, they are usually cheap. Workers from Bangladesh, India or the Philippines are happy to work for salaries which are high in comparison to their home countries but low in the host country. Foreign workers are also ready to work in remote places or at times when local workers would not. A second point is that foreign workers are usually job-ready. They do not need expensive college education or training. They may have skills not available in the new country. A third point is that many migrant workers are ready to work in jobs that are too dirty or dangerous for nationals such as construction or cleaning. All these advantages mean that the economy is boosted by cheap labor and low production costs.

However, there are hidden costs to the economy of the country. One major drawback is that the workers are sending a lot of money home, instead of spending it. This results in a loss of foreign exchange for the country. Another point is that they may take jobs from locals. More importantly, they reduce the salaries for some jobs. For example, employers will pay very low salaries for some jobs which some locals might like to do but could not survive on. Security is another issue. Foreign workers can leave at any time if there is a political or other problem, and this can mean a sudden loss of skills and experience. An additional point is that the influx of foreign workers can put pressure on services such as hospitals or housing, and these costs have to be paid by the state, not the employers who are getting rich. All these factors can result in economic problems for the government.

In conclusion it’s important to have some control over the use of foreign workers, and to make sure that using them does not disrupt the labor market for local workers. One way is to pay them higher salaries and give them full protection. Countries should seek to employ their own citizens first before turning outside and depending on foreign labor.

Writefix.com

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

Tag: economy

Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Short)

Related Posts:

Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Long)

Related Posts:

More sports & fitness centers?

Related Posts:

Effects of ageing on society (long)

Related Posts:

Effects of ageing on society (short)

Related Posts:

University: Theory or Practice?

Related Posts:

Government spending on art

Related Posts:

Do foreign workers benefit the host country? (long)

Related Posts: