Writing Feedback / Modern technology has made shopping today easier, while others disagree. Discuss both view [2]

new technology and shopping

While it is a common belief that breakthroughs in technology have accelerated shopping more convenient, others are opposed to this statement. This essay will examine both these views before giving the final verdict.

On the one hand, state-to-the-art technology has brought about a variety of amenities for consumers. First of all, online shopping stemming from the advent of smartphones and laptops with an internet connection has facilitated the public to order food and drinks without heading out for a supermarket. As a result, consumers could be able to shorten meal preparing time, which, in turn, aids them to allocate more time for work. Additionally, modern technology has provided customers with a precious opportunity to steer clear of squandering hours to stand in line for billing. This is because cashiers these days are equipped with an array of money counting machines, which lessens billing time compared to the past when cashiers had to count money notes by themselves without any technological assistance.

On the other hand, other opponents assert that brand-new technology might trigger some unanticipated hurdles in shopping. One of the most plausible downsides of harnessing technology in shopping is to challenge the elderly generation. For instance, people with inherited disadvantages in mountainous areas in Vietnam are inclined to ignore online shopping since they fail to perform complicated tasks on a smartphone to order necessities. In tandem with this, harnessing technology in shopping also requires customers to provide a variety of personal information for security purposes, which demands consumers to be patient. Consequently, this rigorous checking might result in some undesired shopping experiences for customers.

In conclusion, although some people contend that modern technology might cause several unanticipated difficulties for consumers, it is my firm conviction that people are likely to go shopping more convenient in light of the device of up-to-date technologies.

Writing Feedback / Solutions to address traffic and environmental issues [2]

IELTS Writing Task 2:
Topic:
The most effective way to solve the current traffic and pollution problems in cities is to encourage people to move from the suburbs or the countryside into the city centre.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Answer:
Traffic and pollution-related issues have been cited as one of the most complicated issues that require governments to impose strict measures to address. While it is believed that stimulating the influx of rural citizens to the innermost metropolitan areas is the ultimate solution to tackle the described problems above, I completely disagree with this view.

On the one hand, the mentioned scheme above will deteriorate the existing gridlocked rush-hours traffic and pollution-related problems. Indeed, immigration will contribute to explosive growth in the number of city dwellers whose private cars will exert severe pressure on road capacity. Take Bangkok as a prime example, the year-on-year soar in the number of cars stemmed from immigrated rural citizens is exacerbating bottlenecks in the city centre, which forms a lengthy queue of cars at peak hours. Additionally, the migration of rural people to urban areas will exert detrimental impacts on the environment, especially air quality. The demand for car ownership of these people will put air quality at high risks of being severely polluted since the fossil fuels burning of private cars is likely to worsen air pollution, the main contributor to climate change.

On the other hand, motivating rural citizens to urban areas might urge the government to embark on different schemes to enhance traffic infrastructure. In practice, yearly road expansion projects are implemented in developing countries to alleviate traffic congestion as well as traffic collisions triggered by the excessive increase in the number of suburbs citizens whose private cars will overwhelm road capacity. In tandem with this, the government might encourage commuters to use public transports, including sky trains and underground trains once immigration is encouraged, which will mitigate air pollution.

In conclusion, I am not in favour of stimulating people from the countryside as well as suburbs to the innermost urban areas to tackle traffic and pollution-related problems though this scheme might bring about several advantages.