Writing Feedback / IELTS TASK 2: Whether working for one or several places [2]

changing working places or stick to one

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

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge.

The majority of people may consider one question, whether they will work in the same enterprise for all their career or not when they get hired for the very first time. In fact, considering all the factors in every perspective and listening to suggestions given from veterans would be dominant actions before making any decisions.

For those who work for the same organization may have the advantage of a thorough understanding of the working environment and working standard that supervisors would be satisfied with. Also, they may be familiar with colleagues that are good of both making outstanding cooperation and reach mutual consensus during the procedure. In addition, they may get more opportunities for promotions and even more pension after retirement. As for the companies' owner, there's a high likelihood that they think this sort of employees are more loyal and trusted.

However, working at the same place may cause the problem of lacking working variety. On the contrary, people work for different occasions wouldn't have this problem, though. Apart from doing various types of works, they may also have chances to work with colleagues who hold different personalities. Therefore, they can gain more working experiences and increase their connections with people. I remembered that one of my friends told me about her journey to finding jobs. Initially, she was quite happy with being hired in a small company were employees owned plenty of free time and working spaces while paying with appropriate wages. After working for several years with high efficiency, one of her supervisors saw her potentials and recommended her to another international enterprise. She took the advice and transferred to the large scale corporation. She was quite struggling with the small working environment at first. Subsequently, she realized that this company has better welfare for workers and opportunities for meeting up with clients from different countries as well as the chances to go for retraining in affiliated companies around the world without spending huge amounts of money.

In a nutshell, by changing working places you can learn things from different people, step out of your comfort zone, enhance your adaptability, and extend your visions. From my perspective, it's better to work for different enterprises once you are a well-planning person.

Please feel free to comment. Thank you!

Writing Feedback / IELTS Task 2- Developed and developing nations should both combat climate change [5]

Who's responsible for tackling climate change?

Some people think that developed countries have a higher responsibility to combat climate change than developing countries. Others believe that all countries should have the same responsibilities towards protecting the environment. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. Write at least 250 words. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

With the environmental issues being disregarded in the past few decades, they start to bring plenty of significantly and unexpectedly negative impacts on our daily life. Therefore, human beings begin to raise the awareness of issues, such as sustainable developments and carbon emissions, and governors discuss solutions on international conferences officially. The question of what each country can do to protect the environment has become more and more prominent. However, some people believe that all countries around the world are equally responsible when it comes to combating climate change while others think that developed countries have a greater responsibility than developing countries.

Apparently, there's no doubt that climate change is a universal, global problem; thus, solutions are necessary to be a global scale, too. In my point of view, developed countries should be the first responders to deal with climate change issue than developing countries since they possess more resources and professional knowledge. In addition, developed nations are obviously more capable of leading other nations to find proper solutions and take actions to solve this severe global issue. Another reason is that all kinds of pollutions that had been caused by developed countries in the past decade are destroying Earth continuingly nowadays, they should take the first action to prevent our planet from walking at the edge of dying.

On the other hand, developing countries should also combat climate change by following developed nations' instructions. Although they have a limitation on providing professional advice, they still can cooperate with developed nations, improve the carbon footprints and do their best to protect the mother nature.

In conclusion, combating climate change isn't the issue only for developed countries to concern about but for every nation on Earth. Perhaps, developed countries seem to take more actions than developing countries, but in fact, developing countries should take responsibilities as much as developed countries do. Overall, in order to maintain our life quality, I firmly believe that all nations should stay in positive attitudes towards not only the aspect of coping with climate change but also the environment around the world.

Writing Feedback / IELTS Writing Task 2: Is it good to increase the life expectancy? [2]

what brings the extended life expectancy of human?

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? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

With scientific methods being renewed and medical facilities being modernized, medical researchers possess more and more resources on combating deadly diseases and setting up efficient preventions for our bodies which, for sure, benefit in increasing human beings' life expectancy. However, it also brings both positive and negative effects on our society.

To begin with, with the expansion of life expectancy, people are able to do several things with no time limitation. To cite, firstly, people have chances of spending more time with family, friends and spouses. Secondly, time restriction won't ever be an obstacle for people who desire to pursue their dreams, like traveling to various nations to experience the diversity of human civilization in person. Thirdly, the elderly own more life skills and experiences which can share them with the coming generation. Expanding lifespan even brings a huge advantage for those experts, such as physicists and biologists, who discover a groundbreaking theory in their late ages. Thanks to the enhanced medical research and treatment, those scientists will be capable of writing and sharing their theory and even educating their apprentices on their own in no hurries. Extensively, it may speed up scientific development significantly.

Despite these advantages, there are still a few drawbacks of extending lifespan that may affect our society negatively. The population of elder-ages will definitely increase dramatically which has a high possibility to influence the economy. Take Japan as a typical example, due to its aging society, the authority is now facing with serial economics and medical problems including the lacking of young labors, the payment of pension, and the complete system of long-term care.

In conclusion, it's clear that extending life expectancy brings plenty of benefits in many aspects for both youngsters and governments. In my point of view, thus, I believe that increasing life expectancy has more merits than disadvantages.