Câu hỏi:

19/08/2025 747 Lưu

Some think that people should not change their jobs while others think they should because it brings advantages for themselves, company, and society. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Quảng cáo

Trả lời:

verified Giải bởi Vietjack

Sample 1:

Apart from people who long for a stable and long-term job, many want to experience different occupations as they assume it is beneficial to themselves, company and society. Personally, while both have their own merits, I believe it is better to have a job change for reasons including self-enhancement.

On the one hand, committing to one job can ensure financial stability for employees. As people work at one place for a long time, they will have a stable income and other benefits such as health or social insurance, plus promotions considering their contributions. These rewards and policies are usually applied to full-time employees or those who have worked for over a year. Applicants frequently job-hopping stand a lower chance of getting accepted into a new workplace and are more likely to face unemployment in the future. Most employers would reconsider hiring candidates with a background of switching jobs regularly as this behaviour is often associated with the stereotypical image of an unreliable and easily dissatisfied worker.

On the other hand, changing jobs once in a while can help people, especially the young, have the opportunity to develop a broader knowledge base and learn new skills. Many are put under new challenges such as fitting in or learning new procedures when working in a new environment, significantly enhancing their communication and problem-solving skills. Moreover, job hoppers can achieve career advancement without spending years for promotions, but they are often required to adapt more quickly and showcase their ability. Their efforts to outperform can potentially create better business outputs and build a skilled workforce for a country's competitive economy.

In conclusion, while working at one place can offer employees a more stable income and career prospects, switching jobs can boost their skills and benefit the company they work for and the country's economy. However, I believe that it is better to have a job change occasionally to foster personal growth from new challenges.

Sample 2:

People have opposing opinions about whether we should frequently change our jobs. In this essay, I will analyse both sides of the argument before arriving at my conclusion.

There are certain reasons why people think that it is a good idea for employees to change their jobs. The most important reason is that this is believed to help employees to have a diverse range of knowledge and experience. When they take up employment in a different company in the same industry, or a company in another industry, they have the chance to learn new knowledge and skills. For example, a lawyer working in a law firm can learn a lot by starting work in the legal department of a manufacturing company; this is because the nature of the work at the two companies is different. The diverse skill set that a person who frequently changes his/her job has allows this person to perform better at work and be entitled to a higher salary and better job-related benefits. 

However, I do not think that we should change our jobs frequently. First, I believe that having specialised and solid knowledge and skills in an industry is more valued than having a diverse range of knowledge. Tasks at work are best performed by employees who have done the same tasks for years and know how to perform them the most productively. For example, a doctor who masters a certain field of medicine is more valued by patients than the one that knows a lot of fields but does not specialise in any field. Another argument against frequently changing jobs is that when we change our occupation, we have to learn how to adapt to a new working environment. This is a time-consuming and sometimes stressful task.

In conclusion, although there are certain reasons why people advocate changing jobs frequently, I support the argument that we should stay in the same job for as long as we can.

Sample 3:

The topic of changing jobs can be a sensitive topic, with some believing that doing so equips workers with a more expansive skill set and allows companies to save on training costs. I, however, contend that it is more disadvantageous to change jobs since it can hinder an individual’s career and companies may continually struggle to hire new employees.

A key benefit of workers changing jobs regularly is that they can be equipped with a more diverse skill set. As different jobs utilize different knowledge bases, employees may be able to acquire a wide-ranging variety of professional skills. Therefore, in the future when a new job is offered to them, employees will be better prepared for the work entailed at any given position. For companies, when their employees switch occupations, they can save time and money on training. Firms can do this by hiring someone with equal or more experience than the previous person in the same field. Therefore, the quality of the products or services being offered by these firms will remain consistent.

However, switching jobs can hinder a worker’s career as companies may be reluctant to hire such individuals. Employers understandably may hold a prejudice against those who frequently alternate between occupations as they think a so-called ‘job hopper’ will not be able to contribute to their company long-term and thus it would be counterproductive to commit resources to them. When it comes to how companies themselves can be negatively affected by job hopping, they may continually struggle when finding new employees who can meet their requirements. This is evident with how international accounting firms have a higher-than-average turnover rate at the junior level, meaning that they are in a near-endless cycle of hiring new people.

In conclusion, while changing jobs can help workers acquire vital skills and companies save time and money for training, I would assert that the drawbacks are much more substantial, as it can impede one’s career and companies can suffer from potentially high turnover rates.

Sample 4:

In this modern era, switching jobs now and then is no longer something unfamiliar, especially to the millennials. This present-time tendency has posed a debate of whether job-hopping or life-long employment would be more beneficial for the employees, the employers, or the public. This essay will look at both standpoints and suggest its favor for the long-term employment of one workplace.

It is understandable why someone advocates job changing. The first reason is that switching to a different job keeps employees busy and helps them develop valuable professional skills. When a person starts a new job, he is kicked out of his comfort zone and forced to learn new systems, new routines, new names, and new people’s skills. A staff who has flexibility and willingness to enter the unknown will be an asset to companies that require a mobile and malleable workforce. Moreover, it is difficult to significantly increase the annual salary while staying at the same company because a wage raise is usually calculated as a percentage of the base salary. Therefore, employees often switch between jobs to enjoy such financial gain.

However, there are more sound reasons to believe that aiming to stay at the same job career-long seems to be a more holistic solution. Firstly, while I acknowledge a major downside of a one-workplace career is stagnation, this issue can be solved by training programs offered either internally or externally. This means remaining at the same job can still secure one’s professional development. Secondly, a company may operate more sustainably if it can keep the turnover rate minimal. This comes down to the fact that a firm appears to suffer from significant financial loss if their staff leave too often, as they would have to pay more for recruiting and training processes. Also, failing to maintain loyal personnel would affect its reputation, leading to more difficulty in attracting talented workers and maintaining a strong workforce, which is a key factor for the healthy development of an organization.

To conclude, it is persuasive that encouraging people to stay at the same job would have more gains than losses at all levels rather than doing the other way around. Nonetheless, an employee should feel free to consider a shift in occupation if it is more suitable for their situation.

Sample 5:

Whether employees should jump from one job to another, or they should work at the same position throughout their career has been a controversial topic. In my opinion, while changing jobs can be beneficial to a certain extent, being in a similar position is more advantageous to both the individual and the employer.

On the one hand, career changes can benefit employees in many ways. First, job hoppers can hone diverse skills and possess an expansive knowledge spanning across different fields. As each position requires unique abilities, when switching jobs, employees can master a new skill, which can be of importance to positions that entails cross-department communication and cooperation. Moreover, individuals who change jobs often will be less likely to become jobless, as their diverse skill set can be applied in any post. For instance, during the Covid-19 pandemic, people who had additional knowledge in a field different from their job can find new positions once personnel reduction took place.

On the other hand, advocates of working constantly in one post have firm grounds to argue that this trend has numerous positive effects. Concerning individuals, being loyal to a position means that their incentives are high, including seniority bonuses as well as labor insurance. Whereas job hoppers can never expect this as their short-term work will always put their benefits at a new employee level. As for companies, having faithful employees can help them cut training costs and avoid problems that can arise from newcomers. When a new member joins the team, the company has to pay for their lack of efficiency and experience. This is not the case of longtime employees, whose incentives are only tools to motivate them to achieve greater success, not a retribution on the company for their senior employees’ mistakes.

In conclusion, while it is fair to argue that jumping between jobs can help individuals broaden their skill set, working in one position constantly can have numerous positive effects on both the employees and the employers.

Sample 6:

Several people believe that they should work for the same company for the remainder of their lives, while others believe that their jobs should be varied. This paper would examine both viewpoints and explain why the latter is, in my opinion, more favourable.

On the one hand, individuals who believe that staying at the same job makes it simpler to work argue that it is more convenient. In other words, if someone has worked for an organisation for a long time, he or she will be at ease performing any task because everyone knows who they are. For example, a member of my extended family has worked for a financial organisation for over a quarter of a century because he enjoys and is content working there. As a result, many people, particularly the elderly, are hesitant to change careers since they are perfectly satisfied with their current position.

Opponents of this viewpoint believe that a person should be able to change jobs at any time, which means that he or she should be able to transfer to different faculties based on their preferences. Furthermore, job variety not only makes a person happy, but it also allows them to get new experiences and expand their capabilities. For example, according to recent research, the majority of employees are quitting their jobs in order to advance in their careers. As a result, nowadays, young people choose to change jobs in order to further their careers and accumulate wealth.

In conclusion, it is apparent that staying in the same career is joyful for those who oppose change; nevertheless, those who change their profession on a regular basis have a high chance of advancement. As a result, I fully believe that a person should bring variety to their future career path.

CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ

Lời giải

Sample 1:

The issue of addressing the global challenge of feeding a rapidly expanding population has spurred discussions about potential solutions, including the adoption of Genetically Modified (GM) foods. While some proponents argue that GM foods present a viable answer to this problem, I fundamentally disagree. The potential risks associated with GM foods and the availability of alternative sustainable approaches make me skeptical about their efficacy as a long-term solution.

To begin with, Genetically Modified foods often involve the manipulation of organisms' genetic makeup to enhance desirable traits, such as increased crop yield or resistance to pests. While this may seem promising in theory, the unintended consequences of genetic modification could pose significant risks to human health and the environment. For instance, allergens or toxins could be inadvertently introduced into GM crops, leading to adverse effects on consumers. The release of genetically modified organisms into the environment could also disrupt natural ecosystems and harm biodiversity.

Additionally, the push for GM foods detracts attention and resources from more sustainable and holistic agricultural practices that have the potential to address food security challenges without compromising safety. Agroecological approaches, such as crop rotation, agroforestry, and integrated pest management, offer environmentally friendly alternatives to intensive monocultures and chemical-based farming. These methods promote soil health, water conservation, and biodiversity, all of which are crucial for ensuring the long-term sustainability of food production.

In conclusion, while the growing global population necessitates innovative solutions for food security, I am opposed to the idea that GM foods offer a viable remedy. The potential risks to human health and the environment, coupled with the availability of more sustainable agricultural practices, make me doubtful about the long-term efficacy of genetically modified foods. Instead of relying solely on GM foods, it is imperative to explore diverse and sustainable approaches that prioritize both human well-being and the planet's health.

Sample 2:

To tackle food shortages, many scientists recommend genetically modified (GM) food as a solution. Despite some concerns regarding this solution, I strongly believe that this is the future for food security.

The first benefit that GM foods offer is that it has significantly higher yield compared to traditional crops. GM foods have their genes altered to reproduce their cells quicker, leading to faster crop productions. Also, GM foods are capable of withstanding harsh environments, such as during winters and dry summers. Another benefit of consuming more GM foods is that they require fewer pesticides, contrary to popular belief. Because scientists design GM foods to be resistant to common pests, farmers do not need to spray pesticides as regularly as they would growing traditional crops.

However, despite these benefits, there are some concerns that researchers should revisit before populating GM foods. The first concern is the impact GM crops have on the ecosystem. Because these crops are known to be resistant to pests, it could lead to the eradication of pest species. As a result, this can disrupt the ecosystem’s balance. The second concern is that, due to GM crops’ high efficiency and rapid growth, they can easily become an invasive species with unhealthy farming practices. This problem, aside from damaging the ecosystem, also has adverse effects on the economy. For example, if one plot destined to grow a certain plant gets invaded by another species, farmers will experience a loss of income.  

In conclusion, although admittedly, there are some legitimate concerns for GM foods, I still strongly agree that GM crops are the most feasible solution to the global food shortage.  

Sample 3:

Feeding the ever-growing world population is undoubtedly a significant challenge that needs to be addressed. Some individuals argue that genetically modified (GM) foods could provide a viable solution to this problem. In my opinion, while GM foods may offer certain benefits, they also come with potential risks and drawbacks that need to be carefully considered.

Proponents of GM foods argue that they can help increase crop yields, improve nutritional content, and enhance resistance to pests and diseases. This, they claim, would enable farmers to produce more food on less land, ultimately helping to feed a larger population. Additionally, GM foods have the potential to withstand harsh environmental conditions, such as drought or extreme temperatures, making them more resilient and reliable sources of food.

However, it is important to acknowledge the concerns surrounding GM foods. Critics argue that the long-term health and environmental impacts of consuming and cultivating GM crops are not yet fully understood. There are also ethical considerations, such as the potential for corporate control over the food supply and the loss of biodiversity. Furthermore, the introduction of GM crops into natural ecosystems could have unforeseen consequences, disrupting delicate ecological balances.

In conclusion, while GM foods may offer some potential benefits in addressing the challenge of feeding a growing world population, the risks and uncertainties associated with their widespread adoption cannot be ignored. It is crucial to conduct thorough research and risk assessments to ensure that the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks. Ultimately, a balanced approach that takes into account the needs of both current and future generations is necessary to tackle this pressing issue.

Sample 4:

Whether GM foods are the ultimate answer to address the need to feed the ever-growing global population has been a topic of fierce argument recently among intellectuals across the world. However, I fully agree with the statement that such foods are an effective remedy to worldwide food scarcity.

One obvious advantage of GM foods is better production in lesser time which will ensure food for more people that too utilizing a few resources. In addition, these foods and their cultivation are a lot more environmentally-friendly than normal foods because the former are highly resilient to diseases, pests and insects which reduces the need to use harmful herbicides, pesticides, insecticides and so on. This also ensures that people get pure fruits and grains, for example, free from chemicals.

Better texture, varied flavors and improved nutritional values are some other qualities which make genetically modified foods a viable solution to shortage of food. When such high-quality foods are made available at cheaper prices, it will sure save governments and individuals substantial sums of money, not to mention the obvious health benefits for people. Further, longer shelf-life makes bioengineered foods easier to transport to distant places and store them. Last but not least, their potentially non-allergenic nature makes them Manna from heaven for the hungry millions.

In short, GM foods are the need of the hour. Therefore, the authorities across the world need to spring to action to mass-produce genetically-engineered foods and make them available to people thereby saving hundreds of thousands of lives from malnutrition and starvation.

Sample 5:

As the population is increasing at a fast rate across the world, a shortage of food is becoming a perplexing problem. Some individuals suggest that this can be addressed by genetically modified foods. In my opinion, I totally disagree with the statement since engineering genetic foods have a high risk of potential problems and negative environmental impacts.

The main issue of genetic modification organism is a risk of potential problems after having the food for a long-term. This is because scientists or nutritionists are not sure about the long-term effects and safety as it is a relatively new practice. For example, food allergic reactions have risen in the last decade such as nuts or dairy products, which resulted from consuming GM foods. In addition, there are also a large number of people who hold concerns about the potential risks to human health affected by GM crops such as inducing mutations in human genes. Therefore, numerous people have an inclination toward eating organic food rather than GM foods.

Another thing to consider is that the agricultural method of GMOs brings harmful effects on the environment and ecosystem. Firstly, the changes in the agricultural practice affect on the farming and where weeds or other harmful factors become stronger. This results in overuse of the toxic sprays such as pesticides and herbicides. Secondly, the new cultivation method is harmful for non-GMO crops and also insects or animals, which can lead to loss of biodiversity. To illustrate this, bees play an important role in the pollination of various food crops, but they are vulnerable from the sprays.

In conclusion, I am strongly opposed to the opinion that genetically modified foods can deal with

a shortage of food due to the world demographic growth. This is for the reason that it has potential problems affecting people’s health and it has negative effects on environmental impacts and biodiversity.

Lời giải

Sample 1:

In recent years, the debate over the preference between public transportation and private cars as modes of transport has gained prominence. While some advocate for the convenience and comfort of private vehicles, others highlight the adverse effects of excessive car usage, such as traffic congestion. This essay explores the merits and drawbacks of relying on public transport.

One significant advantage of public transportation is its role in alleviating traffic congestion. Shared modes of commute, like buses and trains, reduce the number of private cars on the road, easing the strain on urban traffic networks. Moreover, public transport contributes to environmental sustainability by minimizing air pollution and reducing the overall carbon footprint. By fostering a communal travel experience, it promotes a sense of shared responsibility for the environment.

On the flip side, public transportation may present challenges such as fixed schedules and potential overcrowding during peak hours. Delays or disruptions in service can inconvenience commuters, impacting their punctuality and productivity. Additionally, the lack of personal space and privacy on crowded buses or trains may deter some individuals from choosing public transport as their primary means of travel.

In conclusion, public transportation offers significant advantages in mitigating traffic congestion and promoting environmental protection. However, its drawbacks, including fixed schedules and potential overcrowding, also need consideration. Striking a balance between individual convenience and collective environmental responsibility remains crucial in addressing the transportation needs of modern urban societies.

Sample 2:

While some people choose to use public transportation, others prefer to use their own cars. It is believed that the excessive usage of personal cars has caused congestion problems in big cities and therefore people should use public transportation more often. However, public transportation has its own positive and negative sides, and the following essay will discuss them in detail.

It is undeniable that public transportation has some weaknesses. Some people still choose to use their own private vehicles, though the government has encouraged them to use public transport. It is because public transportation is not as safe as private cars and some criminal activities on public buses or trains such as pocket thieves are still being reported. And then public transportations are not reliable in terms of preciseness and accuracy. Many people have complained about the preciseness and the consistency of these public transportation schedules, which impacted their work or study time.

Despite its weakness points, public transportation brings a lot of benefits for individuals and societies. Firstly, it is clear that the existence of public transportation will automatically reduce traffic problems. Secondly, if the utilisation of public transportation increased, it means that there will be a reduction in the consumption of fossil fuels. Consequently, it will reduce air pollution and global warming issues. Therefore, the governments should encourage their residents to use public transportation.

In conclusion, people have different opinions about public transportation. Some people enjoy using them, while others choose to use their own personal vehicles. Although public transportation has some weaknesses, I do believe that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. I also suggest that the government should improve the public transportation services, therefore more and more people are attracted to use public transportation.

Sample 3:

Transportation is playing an important role in every nation's development process, and this is an important aspect of our life for mobility. Some people believe that private cars are the best means of transportation while others say that public transport service should be used for this purpose. However, as far as I am concerned, I firmly agree that public transport service should be our main means of transportation. The advantages and demerits of using public transportation are discussed in this essay.

The very first advantage of using public transportation service is that it reduces the burning of fossil fuel. We all know that fuels like petrol and diesel take millions of years to make. Therefore, if we do not decrease the usage level of these fuels then in future it will be diminished. So to make sure that it will not happen in future, we need to save these fuels as much as possible. The very first step towards it is the usage of the public transport service. Since public transportation can carry a large number of passengers it reduced the overall fuel consumption. Thus, it helps to reduce air and environmental pollution.

Secondly, more pollution will be generated if we opt to use private cars for transportation. The more personal cars on the road, the more pollution it will generate. So if we use a bus or a train for roaming, then we can do our part to decrease environmental pollution. Further, transportation cost is cheaper in the case of public transportation. Another aspect is the accident risk. In private cars, the probability of accident on road has increased dramatically. Last but not least, public transportation increases your social contacts. Your social life will scatter with the use of the government transport service.

Every coin has two sides and that is true for the usage of public transportation as well. Firstly, public buses or trains take more time to travel to some place. It does not take any shortcuts and also runs at limited speed. On the other hand, with a private car, you can go to any place in a very short time. Secondly, public transport service is limited. One has to make sure that he/she has the timetable of public buses or trains. If one does not have timing record, then it generates some hurdles for the travellers. There is little privacy on public transportation, and you can’t relax in a crammed public bus or train.

All in all, I would conclude by saying that the public transport service has more advantages than its disadvantages. Further, I like to suggest that buses or trains should our main transportation types. Private cars should be used for urgent needs only. Otherwise, public transportations should be used. It will save our environment.

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP