雅思大作文

Some people say governments should give priority to health care, while others believe that taxpayers' money should be spent on other important priorities. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

People have different opinions revolving around the issue regarding what governments should give priority to. Some argue that it would be better to consider health care first, while others believe the other way around. And the arguments for both sides will be discussed in detail below.

There are various reasons why some people argue that health care should be a priority for the government. Above all, they may believe that health care is the most important thing that concerns people's well-being. Nowadays, people's medical expenditure is soaring, more and more people can not afford increasingly expensive medical care. Especially for some low-income people, access to basic medical services at a low cost has been their primary/top concern.Besides,for many people, they can feel more directly the benefits of increased government spending on health care than in other areas.

However, others believe that there are many other areas that are more important than health care and more worthy of the government's priorities. For example, in their view, both education and emerging industries need more government investment. Education is fundamental to a country. Underdeveloped education can hardly cultivate enough talents with international competitiveness, further affecting the competitiveness of the country. And emerging industries are the supporting points of the country's future economic growth, and are also crucial to the development of the country.

From my perspective, we should strike the right balance between the above two viewpoints. That is to say, the government should arrange the budget reasonably according to the importance of various fields and the development goals. Although health care is vital to people's lives, the government also needs to consider the overall development of the country in the longer term.

The leaders or directors of organizations are often older people. But some people say that young people can also be a leader, what extent do you agree?

It is true that the leaders and senior managers of many large companies are elderly people. However, I think some excellent young people are also qualified to hold important positions in large organizations.

There are various reasons why some people argue that the elderly are more competent for important leadership positions. Above all, they may believe that older people have more work experience. Because they have experienced various setbacks and changes during even decades of work, and are more capable of dealing with the complex situations that the organization faces. Besides, the aged are more mature and steady. They won't make decisions hastily, but after careful consideration. And such decisions are usually more consistent with the overall and long-term interests of the company.

However, compared with the old generation, young people also have many edges. For example, many outstanding young people tend to have cutting-edge knowledge and technology, and they know how to deal with the new business world. In addition, they are also more adventurous, and it is indispensable to companies to open up new roads.

From my perspective, age should not be the only criterion for selecting talents. The position should be left to those who are most competent for it, whether they are young or old. Moreover, to a certain extent, young people holding important positions can also bring new ideas to the development of the company.

Some students take one year off between finishing school and going to university, in order to travel or to work. Do you think advantages outweigh disadvantages?

It is true that an increasing number of students choose to spend a year traveling or working after they graduate from high school but before entering college. Although it can bring many benefits to students, I think its disadvantages should not be ignored.

There are various reasons why some students choose to do so. Some students who choose to travel think that after years of busy study, they need time to relax. And travel can broaden people's horizons, increase people's experience, and bring a lot of knowledge that can't be learned from textbooks. And some people choosing to work believe that they need to figure out what they are really interested in, so that they can choose the major that they really like when they go to college.

Despite these advantages, this view still cannot be supported by some parents and teachers. Above all, they may believe that it is not worthy of spending a whole year traveling or working, because they can use their holidays to do these things. Secondly, all they can do now are just some simple tasks that do not allow them to find their true interest. Finally and most importantly, many parents worry that they may actually waste a year's precious time, despite/in spite of their good original intentions.

From my perspective, students should weigh the advantages and disadvantages and strike the right balance between the above two viewpoints. That is to say, careful consideration must be given before they make this decision. And they need to realize that if they indulge in it and lose their studies, it would be a great pity.

An increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment. Why is this case? What can be done to reduce this problem?

With the development of industry, people's material productivity has been continuously improved, and social consumer goods are also increasing rapidly,but the corresponding cost is the depletion of natural resources and environmental pollution. Then what on earth causes this problem?

I think there are two main factors contributing to that. On the one hand,the increase in population and demand has led to a sharp rise in consumption of commodities/goods. For example, in the past, a piece of clothing could be worn for many years, but now, in order to catch up with the fast-changing fashion trends, clothes worn for only a few months would be thrown away, and they would bring harm to the environment if not properly handled. On the other hand,people lack awareness of environmental protection. Many non-biodegradable materials, such as plastic bags, will be discarded at will after use, which will cause irreversible damage to nature.

So what should we do to prevent the environment from being polluted and destroyed? From my perspective, first of all, the government should raise public awareness of environmental protection through television advertising and other publicity means. In addition, it is also necessary to develop renewable and clean energy, such as nuclear, wind and solar energy, so as to reduce people's dependence on fossil fuels. Finally, every citizen himself should learn to save and recycle to reduce waste as much as possible.

In a word,the environmental damage caused by the increase in consumer goods has increasingly become a social problem of concern, which requires the government and individuals to face together.

In some countries, a high proportion of criminal acts are committed by teenagers. Why has this happened? What can be done to deal with this?

In recent years, the proportion of crimes committed by teenagers has increased dramatically and this has caused a widespread discussion.Then what on earth causes this problem?

I think there are two main factors contributing to that. On the one hand, absence of parental supervision should be primarily responsible for juvenile delinquency. For example, many parents are often busy with their work and neglect to discipline their children. When children make some small mistakes when they are young, they fail to correct them in time, so that they find it too late when children have been on the road to crime. On the other hand, excessive exposure to some violent online games also plays a big role in the increase in youth crime. Nowadays, many online games are full of killing and pornography, and players can do whatever they want in the virtual world without worrying about legal penalties. Many teenagers lack self-control and indulge in it. Even if returning to real life, they still can't get rid of the influence of the game world and thus are prone to crime.

So what should we do to reduce the rate of juvenile delinquency?From my perspective, first of all, the government should raise legal awareness of teenagers through television advertising and other publicity means. In addition, it is also necessary to crack down on internet violence and pornography and clean up cyberspace. Finally, parents should also strengthen supervision over their children so that they can establish correct values.

In a word, juvenile crime has increasingly become a social problem of concern, which requires the government and parents to face together.