Writing Feedback / IELTS Task 2: the same organisation or different organisations? [2]

work in several organizations or devote to an only one

Task 2: Some people work for the same organization all their working life. Others think that it is better to work for different organizations. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

My answer:
It is true that the question of whether to work for the same organization the whole working life or work for different organizations remains a source of controversy in the labor market. While a number of people believe that individuals should work for an organization merely, I would argue that it is better to become a part of some companies.

On the one hand, it is believed that working in just only cooperation can bring several positive results to this problem for some justifications. Firstly, labors might have a good chance to understand clearly and dig deep about the operation of their company. As a result, they can enable company's operation to operate in a smooth way and restrict a variety of unexpected problems. Secondly, working for a long time can assist people in gaining more promotion opportunities. This would lead to rise of pay and benefits with their seniority.

On the other hand, I am in favor of the idea that people should have chances working for some different companies. It is indisputable that they might have more opportunities to choose which working environment is appropriate for them. As a consequence, labors would be fresher and full of energy when they have to work daily. Another compelling reason for the idea is that individuals can think in imaginary ways instead of stereotype when they have already understood clearly about their company. For example, in marketing field where the imagination is encouraged usually, non-experienced labors are still accepted.

In conclusion, although both views certainly have some validity, it seems to me that it is better to work for several organizations instead of just only one.

Writing Feedback / By virtue of upgraded medical health care, individuals have longer longevity as a result... [2]

Task 2: One of the consequences of improved medical care is that people are living longer and life expectancy is increasing. Do you think the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?

Improving medical care?

By virtue of upgraded medical health care, individuals have longer longevity as a result. Although this development has some positive consequences, I am of the opinion that its drawbacks are more significant.

On the one hand, it is believed that great medical care can bring some positive outcomes to people for some justifications. Firstly, it is undeniable that the quality of medical care plays an important role in people's health. For instance, two patients with the same disease but anyone cared by a better medical treatment might have chances to recuperate faster than the other. Secondly, regions or countries which have modern medical treatments can have more opportunities to develop their economic. In fact, foreigners or people from other areas might be attracted by this modern system and they can be willing to pay at high price to be served.

On the other hand, I am in favor of the idea that drawbacks of this development surpass the benefits. One reason for this view is that rising life expectancy can lead to grow up the rate of old population which might be not good for economic development. For example, a lack of young people who are primary labors in the future in Japan is one of the outcomes of population aging process. Another compelling reason for the idea is that people tend to rely on their modern medical care system instead of improving their health or keeping their body healthy by themselves. As a result, they might be less responsible and not take initiative with their health.

In conclusion, it seems to me that the disadvantages of this problem are more remarkable than the advantages.