Students should pay their full university fees themselves as they benefit from having university studies and not the society as whole. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
A nation standard mainly depend on educated citizen. There are some multitude claim that, the scholars who are studying at university is willing to pay their entire fee themselves and also not need to burden that fee from society. I completely disagree this statement due to, if students carried out their money, the rich community would be only get an education.
Firstly, it is an undeniable fact that, the education fare at universities are higher than compare to school , hence this big fare is difficult to adopt the normal person. Perhaps the best example of would be in the fee structure of medical seat in India, where average students only can study at merit seats, others seats carried out a huge amount of donation. Therefore, normal person cannot study high level of profession due to over burden.
Secondly, this scheme may be produce the ricer community to become more rich and poor region to more poor. The high university fare may be chance to reduce the education attraction from poor region, which has build negative impact on under developed community. This way the country might be developing a huge gap between wealthy and poor regions, hence this is not better for societal growth.
Finally, it is a well-known fact that, most of countries are willing to give their citizen to free education, sometimes, they offer free education and research scholarship to foreigners. For example, the country like Germany is fully, freely education to native and foreign people where, their fare from society, hence such place can see that high educated people.
To conclude, it is better to provide education fee from society or government. This not only useful for government, but helpful for students from lower region.
Environmental problems such as pollution and climatic variations are increasing nowadays. The governments have taken some measures at a global level. But they got only few solutions. Why is it so? How can this problem be solved?
In *this* contemporary era, pollution rates as well as climate changes are rising day by day why the authorities cannot take significant response to the world wide level? What are the measures have to solve this issue properly? This essay will analysis this both points.
Saving environment is not only the duty of government, but also *everyone's* responsibility, but nowadays, majority of *the* government cannot take individual decision to take solve this problem because of every country economy is directly depends on some multinational companies growth. It is the fact that, their main resource of that companies has been getting from environmental exploitation and also there are some laws are available for protection that companies policies. That is one of the reasons behind the government measures did not get more effect.
It is better to solve, *this issue by* international organizations. *they* must implement proper laws in ecological area. Perhaps the best example would be, recently, Kerala government ( a state of India ) banned the plastic bags in groceries. Which is helping to protect environment also very effective in waterlogging problem across the cities. Such kinds of initiate should be taken at international level for more protection, sometimes this is negatively affecting the production cost of items though government willing to give some subsidies for meet this issue. Moreover, government *should* support recycled energy source such as wind, solar, hydro electric power these are helping to protect the air pollution across the world.
To conclude, the authorities must implemented proper laws for supporting the economy and the environment *and* also *encourage* renewable energy sources.
Tourism has been a good source of revenue in many countries. Discuss its advantageous and disadvantageous?
The majority of countries , one of the best income source is the tourism, hence there is advantages outweigh than disadvantageous , but this essay will discuss both sides and finally include my view point also.
First and foremost, it is an undeniable fact that, most of the *nation'* backbone of revenue income *comes* from tourism. This way *they* produce local jobs across the tourist place and also where the person’s life expectancy is rising. In addition, foreigner through of attachment help to get good culture, which may be reduced the bad customs approach of the local region. Moreover foreigner can enhance their cultural knowledge and also get high rich history and cultural person from this. Thus, which have a get significant benefits to every national as well as people.
However, it is a well-known fact that, some negative results *are* seen from promoting tourism in some places. Perhaps the best example would be that, indigenous customs are vanishing through promoting tourism in the local area, where people might be adopted the better customs from visitors, that attitude may be vanish some traditional customs across the tourist area.Other main negative result is that, when promoting tourism, the tourist area of business rising, where the natural resource of exploitation chance is high.
To conclude, In my point of view, It is generally known to all, *that* owing to the multifarious benefits from tourism, it has apparently noted that, even if there are some negative attributes from tourism. Therefore,it is better to encourage tourism across the world.
In most of the countries one of the best sources of income is tourism. I think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. This essay will discuss both sides and finally include my view point also.
| Rich countries often give money to poorer countries, but it does not solve poverty. Therefore, developed countries should give other types of help to the poor countries rather than financial aid.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In the contemporary era, it can be seen that, wealthy nationals were given money to poor world for eradicating poverty, for long time ago, but where could not see that much development. Hence, it is unquestionably one of the most worrying situation in that society, and , it supports and others methods should be taken for less affluent nation from wealthy world. I completely agree this point due to, nowadays, this is a common problem around world, thus must be implement relevant solution to solve this problem.
In the twentieth world, it is an undeniable fact that, a majority of poor nations can not recover, even if get large found from developed nations. Perhaps the best example would be the African countries, which place have been getting huge found from wealthy nations like America. However, there could not see that any improvement. Therefore, it is undoubted that, other efficient scheme should be implemented.
First and fore most,it is a well-known fact that, lack of infrastructure and education are a prime reason for underdevelopment of such countries. Initially, this place of people should be given proper education and also provide the relevant vocational training, which would be generate educated society, then the rich countries should be given financial aid for developing infrastructure. Moreover, their have to ready for investing in this place.
Furthermore, the rich countries must be taken and provide scholarship and jobs to students, who are from poor society. It is happy to see now, most of rich society now already starts this scheme. For example, in American and most of European Universities, where the education and placement opportunities are already begging that result could be seen in the developing country like India. Therefore, this way would be helping in the poor countries.
To conclude, proper education and good opportunities for giving to the underdeveloped societies is the best way to reduce poverty in this place.