2019年1月5日雅思写作小范围预测
2019年1月5日雅思写作小范围预测
1. It is better for people to be unemployed than people to be employed but they do not enjoy. Do you agree or disagree?
It is a fact that nowadays people enjoy more freedom in their career options than ever before. For some people, they would rather stay unemployed if the job is unsatisfying. My view is that people need to be realistic while enjoying their right to pursue their dream jobs.
On the one hand, I agree job satisfaction is a critical factor for one’s life satisfaction and wellbeing. It is believed that only by doing a job people enjoy can they achieve a sense of fulfillment and have their value recognized. In contrast, if a person feels unhappy at work for a long time, he or she is likely to develop negative emotions like depression and desperation, which is both physically and mentally unhealthy. Therefore, it is better for people unhappy with their jobs stay unemployed temporarily and take the advantage of this free period to upgrade themselves, whether through a job workshop or professional training courses.
On the other hand, I believe that people need to take various factors into consideration before they make a career decision. First, as for most people, they need a salary to support themselves. As undesirable as the job is, it may be the main source of income for a family and therefore it is indispensable. If people, particularly young graduates who have little savings in their bank accounts, stay unemployed for a long time, they will bring financial burden to their family. Over the time, their energy, willpower and self-esteem will suffer too, which is unhelpful for their later career development. In addition, people do not understand their interest and strength at the beginning until they take jobs and gain more insight into their current jobs. If one insists staying unemployed before he can land an ideal job, he might also lose the chance to explore his potential.
In conclusion, I think that seeking one's favorite job is vital for the long-term career success and personal achievement, but for most people, particularly the freshmen in the workplace, it is wise to take advantage of the job they have, as this job can not only cover their basic needs, but also enables them to identify their interest.
2. Shops should not be allowed to sell any food and drinks which are proved to be scientifically harmful for people's health. Do you agree or disagree?
One of the noticeable phenomena is that some shops have been selling many heath-threatening foods and drinks out of the purpose of reaping profits illegally, which has long been a problem of great concern and complaint in numerous countries. Under this circumstance, an opinion seems to enjoy great popularity that physically detrimental foods should be banned. I am in support of the above statement and this essay endeavors to exemplify my stand.
My first convincing reason can be easily explored. The government, as a decision-maker, is the representative of citizen’s basic interests. In this sense, every governmental policy will inevitably exert a profound influence on its citizens’ well-being index. One of the compelling obligations of the government is to guarantee every food enterprise’s licit business so that the basic interest of its citizens could be ensured. It is conceivable that more sales of health-threatening foods will be encouraged if a nation fails to penalize or restrict those foods containing physically harmful elements.
Another argument I could like to turn to justify my stand is that too much intake of unwholesome some foods will, by all means, undermine one’s health. Specifically, many foods or drinks contain excessive food additives or toxic chemicals，which might contribute to some health-related problems. Chronic disease is a good case in point. Even worse, the unexpected illnesses might bring huge agonies to the family members. Worse of all, free medical care might be unnecessarily wasted if the proportion of unhealthy citizens keeps on soaring.
To make the final point，relevant shopping malls，supermarkets or plazas could achieve profitability if they could establish fine sale fame among their buyers，on the contrary, if their food safety problem is reported by local news papers, then, the public will lose their trust in them and the relevant enterprises’ reputation will end up being greatly ruined. Therefore, it is rather groundless to support the proposal of allowing shops to sell unwholesome foods.
In a nutshell，I re-affirm my stand that every government ought to be urged to adopt feasible measures to minimize the baneful impacts triggered by the sale of unhealthy foods or drinks. After all, the health of its social citizens indicates fine governmental prestige, harmonious family relationship, improved health index and the everlasting profit-making competence of food industry.
3. Some people believe countries have moral obligation to help each ogher; others worry about the aid money cannot get to the poor of this world. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.
When it comes to the issue about how to support developing countries, some people may argue that developed countries should be morally obligated to provide poor countries with monetary assistance, but others believe that that money cannot be really delivered to the people in need.
On one hand, governments of rich countries should be moral to offer impoverished countries support since it could contribute to the world peace. In those remote and poor areas, residents may suffer from various kinds of diseases, as well as poverty. If there are no external funds for them, many people may die inevitably without food supply and medical service. In order to save more poor and ill individuals, the authority of rich countries should take this moral responsibility.
On the other hand, a lot of money cannot be sent to the poor of the world due to the immaturity of institutions in those poor countries. In developed countries, there are usually strict regulations about how charitable funding should be utilized. However, for those poverty-stricken countries, their institutions may not cover every aspect, due to which some money may be corrupted by some officials through some illegal channels. Thus, even if some funding is transferred to poor countries, their officials may be an obstacle for better utilizing funding.
From my own perspective, it may be unrealistic for developing countries to solely rely on the charity from developed countries, and governments of poor countries also need to take some actions. For example, the process of using money from outsiders should be more transparent for better supervision by citizens. Besides, there could be more varieties of assistance from developed countries, including resource and technological assistance, with which those countries in need could develop the economy in a faster pace.
