Câu hỏi:

08/01/2025 217

Many people may work from home using modern technology today. Some people think that only workers benefit from this, not employers. Do you agree or disagree?

Quảng cáo

Trả lời:

verified
Giải bởi Vietjack

Sample 1:

Recent technical advancements have made it possible for more people to work remotely. However, it is commonly argued that this trend solely benefits employees, not companies. I largely disagree with this assertion given the positive impacts of remote working on cost saving and job satisfaction even though company productivity might suffer to an extent.

The foremost rationale for why I believe remote working supports companies is that it allows them to curtail enormous spending. Corporations from various industries such as Google and BMW have reported a significant reduction in expenses encompassing office rentals, equipment and utility bills since the adoption of work-from-home schemes using virtual office spaces such as Google Meet and Zoom. This, in turn, has allowed for more investments in product research and development to outperform their competitors and generate greater profits for stakeholders.

Another justification for my belief that working from home is advantageous to employers is increased job fulfilment among workers. It is because as well as being free from commuting hassle and office regulations, those working remotely generally have more time for family for a harmonious balance between their personal and professional lives. These positive aspects can contribute to a boost in job satisfaction which allows companies to reinforce a committed and motivated workforce that can fuel their success.

Nevertheless, I concede that companies might struggle to ensure efficiency. When working remotely, employees may contend not only with distractions stemming from household responsibilities, such as attending to children and cooking, but also with technical challenges like internet connection disruptions or software failures. These issues can disrupt their workflow, causing them to be less productive than working in a professional office setting.

In conclusion, I am mostly in disagreement with the idea that remote working only offers advantages to workers as it can significantly reduce companies’ spending while increasing employees’ level of contentment allowing for a more dedicated workforce despite a possible decline in productivity. That is why more organisations should adopt this policy and provide people with guidelines and tips on how to work effectively from home.

Sample 2:

In this day and age, there is a swift expansion of technology and It is being used for the benefit of humanity. The most important benefit of developing technology has allowed individuals to work from home. However, some are of the notion that this benefit is advantageous only to the workers and not to the employers. My preference is discussed below.

To begin with, the first and foremost reason is that it reduces expenses associated with the hired workplace. Furthermore, this reduces other workspace expenses while accommodating a more significant number of employees at the same time. In addition to this, employers have the option of lowering workplace expenses such as building maintenance and construction, borrowing land for the workplace, and other relevant initiatives. As the costs of building and owning land are at their peak these days, this could save organizations an ample amount of money. Regarding the expansion of virtual work, these charges can be overlooked in addition to other miscellaneous charges such as electricity bills, water bills, and others. For instance, prior to the pandemic hitting the global nations, extremely low rates in companies were observed in India. After the pandemic, several multinational companies and organizations have understood the importance of working from home and its advantages. As a result of this, these working sectors have started encouraging remote work and have saved a huge amount of capital.

Furthermore, the benefit of remote work is that people do not have to travel distances for work. This has increased their productivity at work and saved them time that they could have spent on more productive activities.

To sum up and offer my position, it is impossible to deny that developing technologies have provided numerous benefits to society by allowing individuals to better manage their time.

Sample 3:

Advancement in technologies has brought various affirmative changes. Where one of the aspects is working from home. However, some believe it is beneficial to the employees and not to employers. In my preference, I firmly agree with such a viewpoint. Both parts are discussed in the ensuing paragraphs.

To begin with, working from home as an employer or an employee has advantages. The first and foremost reason is, that they have a favorable situation because they work in the comfort of their own home. Meanwhile, in their break time, they can also spend significantly more time with their family, thereby improving their relationships with their relatives. As a result, they enjoy working in-house, which results in an increase in their work output and less stress.

However, there are also disadvantages for both the employees and the employer. The major drawback is that employers will not be able to see how the employees work. This causes employers to incur financial losses due to decreased employee performance. Moreover, insufficient interaction time prevents employees and employers from engaging in effective social interactions. In addition, the transfer of skills that require direct instruction does not occur because employers provide only a few instructions without a concrete stance.

In the nutshell, from my viewpoint, it is not true that only workers benefit, and recruiters don’t as they can join hands to form productive partnerships in order to enhance the quality of their business. Most importantly, this aspect of technology helps such organizations and companies to maximize their incomes, and this will indirectly have a great impact on life.

Sample 4:

Due to the advancement in science and technology, working from home rather than commuting to the office has grown in popularity in recent years. Although some argue that it only benefits employees, I do not bolster such a viewpoint. There are compelling arguments to support this position as businesses are also expanding exponentially for the reasons that will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

To begin with, in recent times, companies are utilizing the time of their employees more efficiently. This is primarily due to the development of telecommunications. Supervisors may assign tasks to subordinates during holidays or after they return from vacation. Additionally, they can monitor them using Skype or other video calling apps on their smartphones. Monitoring employees and boosting productivity is thus a tremendous advantage for businesses.

In addition, by reducing their rent and utility costs, employers save a substantial amount of money. Because they work from home, they are also exempt from providing transportation for their employees. In addition to employing specialists from all over the world, businesses are also paying them fewer thanks to technological advancements. Probably due to differences in currency exchange rates. For example, offices pay in small dollar amounts, whereas freelancers are paid in Indian rupees.

To recapitulate, although some argue that the implementation of new technology only benefits labor, I believe that both parties get an advantage. And I firmly believe that if both parties join hands, it will surely result in a great production of that particular working sector.

Sample 5:

The notion of working from home was an obscure practice and has only been a viable choice with the help of technological advancements in the recent past. Amidst the catastrophe of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, most organizations entitled their employees to the privilege of being able to work remotely, and this system has been prevalent ever since. Nevertheless, it has been debatable whether this approach is beneficial only to the employees or both the employers and employees. I believe that this approach has advantages for both parties concerned. In the following paragraphs, I will elaborate on my views on the topic and justify them with relevant examples.

Firstly, employers enjoy the salient benefit when workers are operating from their residence is the exemption of expenses like power, work equipment, maintenance, etc. These are mandatory facilities that need to be provided in an office. Since workers utilize their resources when working from home, this leads to tremendous costs-reduction on the management’s part, which can be termed as an indirect source of profit.

Secondly, an individual can come across various interruptions and distractions in an office from colleagues, supervisors, and other elements in a work environment, which can be detrimental to productivity. Furthermore, daily commutes from a person’s residence to their workplace can be exhausting, which can also lead to a decline in the work rate. However, such hindrances are less commonplace when the ‘work from home’ system is followed, and a person can work at full efficiency leading to better results.

On the other hand, this practice presents the workforce with a considerable amount of liberty that can be misused easily, and there has been an increase in workload as there are no specific working hours. Nonetheless, with proper communication, the benefits that can be reaped from this work method are immense for the entire firm.

Finally, I would like to conclude that improvements in technology have opened up more convenient avenues for productivity. Therefore, as long as the management and employees are putting efforts to work together, the profits will be enjoyed by both.

Sample 6:

The advent of modern technology has facilitated a shift in work dynamics, allowing many employees to perform their duties from the comfort of their homes. I firmly believe that this change is mutually beneficial for both employees and employers.

For employees, the primary benefit is the flexibility and work-life balance that remote work offers. The elimination of daily commutes not only saves time but also reduces stress, allowing employees to start their workday in a more relaxed state. This flexibility often results in higher productivity and job satisfaction. For instance, a study by Stanford University found that remote workers were 13% more efficient than their in-office counterparts. Furthermore, working from home can lead to a healthier lifestyle, as individuals have more time to prepare nutritious meals and engage in physical activities.

Employers, on the other hand, also reap substantial benefits from this arrangement. One significant advantage is the reduction in overhead costs. With fewer employees in the office, there is a decreased need for large office spaces, which translates to lower rent and utility expenses. Moreover, by embracing remote work, companies can access a wider talent pool, no longer limited by geographical constraints. This can lead to the recruitment of more skilled and diverse employees, enhancing the overall quality of the workforce. Additionally, employers often notice an uptick in employee retention, as the flexibility of remote work is a highly valued perk that encourages staff to stay with the company.

In conclusion, the shift towards remote working facilitated by modern technology is a win-win situation, benefitting both employees and employers. Employees enjoy greater flexibility and a better work-life balance, leading to enhanced productivity and well-being, while employers benefit from reduced costs, access to a broader talent pool, and improved employee retention.

Sample 7:

With the advent of modern technologies, the traditional working style has been revolutionized, with remote working gaining in increasing popularity in recent years. This shift has sparked debates about its impact, with some asserting that only employees reap the rewards, leaving employers at a disadvantage. Personally, I believe that the prevalence of online working is beneficial for employers and employees alike.

Those who argue that remote working primarily benefits employees cite the lower amount of stress they have to suffer from. The first explanation for this is that daily commute from and to the workplace may be a major source of frustration for many individuals, especially those living in urban areas who usually get stuck in traffic during rush hour while on the way to work. Distance working, on the other hand, not only eliminates the feeling of road rage by allowing them to start their working day in the comfort of their home, but also translates into fewer commuting-related expenses, which have caused concern among many families on low incomes, considering the escalating cost of fuel in recent years. Another point worth mentioning is that teleworking is conducive to better work-life balance. Given how flexible employees can be when it comes to setting their own schedules, they can strike a balance between family commitments and work responsibilities, which would boost their overall well-being, job satisfaction and hence productivity.

On the other hand, employers can also derive significant benefits from adopting this new approach to work. The first positive aspect of teleworking is that there are significant cost savings, stemming from the fact that maintaining an online workspace eliminates the costs for renting offices, paying utility expenses and other overhead costs. As a result, such financial savings could be allocated to other areas which are likely to make a great contribution to the development of an organization. Moreover, without geographical constraints, employers can reach a wider pool of talented employees. This access to a greater number of skilled and diverse individuals from different regions of the country or even foreign nations can contribute to an organizational workforce which is characterized by dynamism, diversity, innovation and novel perspectives. Ultimately, this would result in enhanced problem-solving abilities and increased competitiveness in the market for the organization.

In conclusion, the impacts of working from home extend beyond the benefits reaped by employees alone. While workers benefit from lower levels of stress brought about by daily commuting to work and improved work-life balance, considerable cost savings and access to a diverse talent pool are the two major plus. points for employers.

Sample 8:

Working remotely has become a common practice for many employees in the modern world as a result of technological advances. However, some people argue that this change may only be advantageous for the workers, not the employers. I agree with this view to a large extent, as convenience and freedom for employees may not adequately compensate for the challenges facing employers.

There are several reasons why working from home may be beneficial to workers. One of the main benefits is that it can conserve the time and money that they would otherwise expend on commuting, dressing up, and eating out. This is especially true for those who normally take over an hour to commute to work. By working at home, they can avoid the traffic, the fuel, and the parking fees, and utilize the extra time for other purposes. Another benefit is that remote working offers employees more flexibility and autonomy to manage their own schedule and work environment. This can help facilitate a healthy work-life balance, in turn reducing stress while increasing job satisfaction.

On the other hand, allowing staff to telecommute may negatively affect employers in several ways. One of the main drawbacks is that they may have to forfeit control and oversight of their employees, as they cannot supervise their work progress and performance as effortlessly as in the office. For example, supervisors and managers may not be able to detect or rectify any staff-related problems that may occur, which can affect the company’s outcomes. Another challenge for employers is that they may encounter communication and collaboration difficulties due to the absence of face-to-face interaction with employees. Indeed, an employer who has a complex or creative project may have to coordinate with their telecommuting employees through emails, calls, or chats, the process of which can be slow and convoluted, thus impeding the innovation and the productivity of the work.

In conclusion, working from home may be beneficial for workers, but not necessarily for employers. While workers may relish more convenience, flexibility, and balance, it is possible that employers would suffer from less control and communication issues without proper precautions.

Sample 9:

It is clear that the rising trend of working from home, facilitated by advancements in technology. has sparked a debate regarding its impact on the workplace dynamics. While some argue that this shift primarily benefits employees, I believe that both employees and employers gain significantly from this modern working arrangement.

Regarding employees, the benefits offered from the shift to working from home are multifaceted. Firstly, operating business tasks remotely provides an unrivaled level of flexibility, allowing for more efficient management of both professional duties and personal tasks. This flexibility often translates into a greater sense of job satisfaction. Secondly, the elimination of daily commuting saves employees significant time and reduces stress. Such stress-relieving effect can lead to improved mental well-being and overall job performance.

For business owners, digitally mediated work may offer unique advantages. A primary benefit is cost reduction, as companies save on expenses related to maintaining traditional office-based setups. This financial saving can be substantial, improving the company's overall budget. Additionally, remote working enables access to a broader global talent repository. By harnessing such unrestricted access, regardless of geographical limitations, corporations can facilitate international collaboration across skilled individuals, improving the quality of their workforce.

In conclusion, the work-from-home model, propelled by modern technology, presents substantial benefits for both employees and employers, challenging the notion that its advantages over physical office spaces are one-sided.

Sample 10:

Working from home with the help of telephone lines, or, in other words, telecommuting has become very popular especially where internet connections are fast and reliable. I disagree with the statement that it can benefit only the employees and not the employers. Telecommuting is a win-win situation for both employers and employees.

There are many advantages of telecommuting to employees. To begin with, it saves time as no time is wasted commuting to and from the office. It also saves money as no spending on private or public transport has to be done. Furthermore, the worker can look after family commitments like dropping the child at school etc. Although most of the work done by teleworkers is monitored, still a few minutes can be snatched at times. Finally, the teleworker can do some side business side by side.

On the other hand, there are many advantages to employers. Firstly, less office space is needed as the workers are Working from home. It is a fact that land prices are exorbitant, and it is very expensive to build large offices. Not only building but maintaining offices is also very costly. Then, it has been seen that employees take less sick leave and other leaves. This is also beneficial for employers.

It would be worthwhile to consider why some people opine that telecommuting is not beneficial for employers. They argue that supervising teleworkers is difficult. Statistics have proved that telecommuters take pains to work well from home as they realize the benefits it has for them.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that telecommuting benefits both workers as well as employers.

Sample 11:

In today’s modern era, technology is expanding rapidly, and it is being used by mankind for their benefit. The major benefit that developing technology has provided is allowing individuals to work from home. There are argument statements that quote that employees are more on the beneficial side and employers are facing challenges due to this. However, according to me, this statement is vague because organizations can save a huge amount of capital by making employees work from home. Moreover, this reduces other expenses associated with the workspace and accommodates an increased number of employees at the same time. Elaborating on the statements stated above, employers have the davnate of reducing the expenses associated with the workplace such as maintenance and construction of buildings, borrowing land for the workplace, and other relevant initiatives. Since, nowadays, expenses of buildings and owning lands are very high, this could save the organizations a lump sum amount of money. Considerations with respect to the expansion of virtual work, these charges can be neglected in addition to other miscellaneous charges such as electricity bills, water bills, etc. To quote an example, India observes an extremely low rate in the companies that used to provide remote work prior to the pandemic hitting the global nations. Post the pandemic, several companies understood the importance of working from home and the associated benefits of working remotely. Thus, most of organizations have started promoting remote work due to which they have saved a huge amount of money and increased their turnover and productivity approaches. The second major reason that can be addressed as the major benefit associated with remote work is the lack of the necessity to travel. Traveling reduces the chances of being stuck in traffic thus leading to increased productivity. This has ensured increased efficiency at work and saved a potential amount of time for them that they could invest in other productive activities. To summarize, it cannot be denied that developing technologies have a number of benefits to society as it has allowed individuals to manage their time effectively. Moreover, it also helps with social life balance.

Sample 12:

Working from home has been an uncommon activity for years, however, it has become a trend and has been adapted as a viable option. This adaptation of working from home culture can be accredited to the developing modern technologies. In the era of COVID-19, the work-from-home culture has been increasingly adopted and most companies have allowed their employees to work from home and this method has become common globally. However, this approach has been a debatable aspect from the past generations. The point of the debate has been whether it is beneficial for the work culture, employees, and employer. However, I believe that this approach has potential advantages for all the parties involved in it. The preceding essay will discuss the topic in a broad manner. First and foremost, there are a number of benefits that are enjoyed by employers due to individuals working from home. Employees working from their respective residences save the companies from investments associated with electricity bills, workplace management, work equipment-related expenses, and many other relevant approaches. These facilities are a necessity for provision within the office premises. Workers utilize their potential resources and are responsible for their expenses, which saves the company a huge amount of capital. This will ensure increased turnover for organizations and ensure increased productivity. Moreover, an individual has to deal with a number of challenges such as interruptions, distractions, and unscheduled breaks from colleagues, supervisors, and other individuals present within the workplace. Thus, such hindrances lead to a major amount of loss in productivity and outcomes. Working from home ensures that employees are free from such hindrances and portray an increased productivity approach. To conclude, appropriate advancements and improvements in technologies have led to several avenues of productivity improvement.

Sample 13:

The advancements in technologies have led to ease in the process of working in all sectors. Technological advancements have led to commence office activities right from our comfort zones. This is a major consideration as few of individuals consider this a setback and others consider it a benefit for the employees and employers. This remote work culture has been increasingly adopted after the world witnessed the COVID-19 pandemic that led to huge numbers of losses of lives on a global scale. Thus, this has become a debatable topic globally. There are a number of benefits that are enjoyed by employers when their employees work from home. Apart from the employers enjoying benefits, it helps the employees with a balanced social life. Employees can stay connected with their families even when they are working. This has helped with respecting the emotional boundaries of the employees and their families. This has also led to an immense increase in the productivity rates of the employees. There are several reasons why there might be productivity loss when an employee is reporting on the floor for work. These hindrances can be due to the presence of colleagues, any accidents, or anything relevant to it. Apart from the increased productivity, employees are able to work extra to the accomplishment of targets when they are working from home. Moreover, as a result, employees and employers can communicate with one another on a daily basis. Most countries were put under lockdown recently owing to the outbreak of the COVID19 virus. It is mandatory for everyone to work from home. Working from home was very much possible thanks to technological advancements. To summarize, technology is everywhere around us. As a result, it is helpful not only to employees, but also to management, and it will increase the company's profit.

CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ

Lời giải

Sample 1:

In recent years, there have been a number of everyday problems that people in big cities have to cope with. This essay will discuss two major problems, pollution and information overload, which I believe should lead governments to encourage people to move to regional areas.

These days, increased levels of pollution have been a great cause for concern among residents of big cities. Due to high volumes of traffic, large quantities of pollutants are being released into the atmosphere, causing the degradation of air quality, which is said to be a significant contributor to various types of respiratory disease, such as lung cancer. Additionally, people in big cities are being bombarded with too much information from the media, including TV, social media, and advertising, with a large proportion of this information being fake or exaggerated. This can lead to confusion or, in some cases, social anarchy.

In my opinion, governments should do what they can to encourage city residents to move to regional areas. Firstly, it will reduce the number of vehicles in cities, which will definitely reduce the levels of air pollution, which is hazardous to the health of citizens. Furthermore, fewer people living in big cities will relieve the pressure on the housing supply, where many people are forced to live in small, uncomfortable spaces. Studies have shown that people’s living spaces have a direct impact on their mental health and how they perform at work.

In conclusion, severe air pollution and a bombardment of information are among the most serious problems facing city residents nowadays, and personally, I feel that authorities should encourage people to relocate to other areas to live.

Sample 2:

It is true that nowadays city residents have to encounter a large number of problems, especially those concerning environmental and social factors. However, encouraging people to migrate to smaller provincial towns, in my opinion, is not a viable solution to these problems.

As living in a metropolis, people are confronted with high level of air pollution, which is caused mainly by the exhaust fumes released into the atmosphere from petrol-driven vehicles. The more populated the city is, the higher the demand for traveling becomes, and as a result, the higher the level of air pollution will be. Living in this environment for a long time is supposed to be detrimental to human’s health as polluted air is the main contributor to respiratory diseases. Another problem involves social aspects such as the issue of unemployment. As many people moving to big cities do not have any skills or qualifications, they are unlikely to find a job. This higher unemployment rate can give rise to the increased criminal activities threatening inhabitants’ life.

Since dwelling in urban centers can have negative impacts, some governments tend to encourage the citizens to relocate to smaller regional towns, but I do not think this will be effective. The first reason for my belief is that this policy cannot guarantee a reduction in air pollution because people still have to commute to their workplace, which is usually located in city center. Indeed, living far away from cities means that people even have to travel a much longer distance to work, which, in fact, can increase the amount of exhaust emissions. The second reason is that finding jobs in the countryside is certainly not easier than in urban areas. Job opportunities in these places are much lower and people usually have to do low-paid jobs if they work in smaller and less developed towns.

In conclusion, it is obvious that living in big cities can create a number of problems, but encouraging people to migrate to suburban areas is, in my opinion, totally not a viable measure at least when it comes to addressing the problems concerning pollution and unemployment.

Sample 3:

It is true that people in major cities are confronting a number of problems in their routine life. This essay will discuss some of these problems and explain the writer’s view that citizens should be encouraged to relocate to the countryside or regional towns.

The urban population is grappling against two main problems out of many. The first issue is the lower quality of life due to the increasingly heavier burden on the existing urban infrastructure. This is because rural immigrants in pursuit of employment opportunities keep inundating the downtown areas of most major cities. For example, most schools and hospitals located in XYZ city are frequently overloaded, making these services inaccessible to the majority of people of lower classes. The second issue is the traffic jam due to the burgeoning car ownership. Arguably, cars take up more space than a motorbike while its capacity to accommodate passengers is far inferior to that of a bus. This weakness results in bumper-to-bumper traffic, particularly in downtown areas where many drivers have to inch along to get away from the terrible traffic.

I think government should encourage citizens to move away from major cities. This is due to the fact that this would relieve the current pressure on the infrastructure. Fewer people would need public services such as hospitals or schools and the roads would be more spacious, ensuring a smooth traffic flow with its resultant fewer accidents for city dwellers. In addition, the resources in the countryside or other less developed regions would be better exploited as there might be available workforce there. For instance, there would be more laborers during harvesting time in the countryside, or skilled or knowledgeable people would help with the construction work in smaller regions, spurring the growth of the local area as well as the nation as a whole.

In conclusion, there are many problems that people in cities are facing, and it is advisable that government encourage the residents to consider relocation to smaller regional areas with a view to solving these issues.

Sample 4:

It is true that nowadays people are shifting to larger cities. There are several negative consequences of this moot issue, and to cope with the current problems, the authorities should encourage individuals to move to smaller cities or even to the countryside.

To begin with, an enormous number of people create problems. One negative consequence is that the urban population would go on increasing and cause housing problems. This leads to the creation of underdeveloped slum areas, where underprivileged individuals must live in poor living conditions like lacking medical care or even drinking water. Another issue is the traffic jam due to the burgeoning car ownership. Arguably, cars take up more space than a motorbike while its capacity to accommodate passengers is far inferior to that of a bus. This weakness results in bumper-to-bumper traffic particularly in downtown areas where many drivers have to inch along to get away from the terrible traffic.

Governments should take steps to move a certain number of city dwellers to less populated areas. The main reason is that shifting people to towns or even the countryside helps to decrease the unemployment rate. This is because as more and more people apply for the same position within a company, it may intensify the competition among employees, making it significantly more difficult to be chosen. Towns, however, due to industrialization, are now able to provide different jobs for engineers or officers in new factories. Therefore, by encouraging job seekers to move to these newly developed areas, the government can lower the number of unemployed individuals in cities.

In conclusion, an increasing number of people living in cities certainly creates housing problems and traffic congestion, and governments should encourage its citizens to migrate to towns.

Sample 5:

More and more people live in cities today than at any point in the past and this trend will likely continue in the future. This has resulted in many problems including extreme overcrowding and governments should take measures to make living outside cities more attractive.

There are a wide range of drawbacks associated with the rise of modern cities but one of the most obvious issues is related to population density. The large number of people crammed into a relatively small area has caused expensive housing, increased traffic and severe pollution. For example, apartment prices in mega-cities like Tokyo and New York have soared to the point where only the wealthiest inhabitants can afford decent living standards. Regardless of financial status, all city dwellers have to deal with more and more traffic jams as the population increases while the area of cities remains fixed. Finally, all these people living and travelling in one place puts a tremendous strain on the environment and some cities, like Beijing in China, have become dangerously polluted.

In my opinion, governments have a duty to encourage citizens to move to more rural areas. If cities continue to expand unabated then the above problems will only get worse. We might one day find ourselves living in densely packed, heavily polluted cities that resemble scenes from a dystopian science fiction film. In order to prevent this from happening, the government can give tax breaks to companies that choose to locate offices and production facilities outside the city. This will provide more jobs for people who are willing to live in the countryside.

In conclusion, the concerns related to overcrowding in cities can and should be somewhat countered by governments incentivising living in rural areas. If this is done then we may still face problems related to cities in the future, but at least they will not be as serious.

Sample 6:

Residing in metropolitan cities has been stimulating some crucial issues in daily activities. Congestion and air pollution are problems related to living in big cities. Thus, these issues have to be tackled by governments through plausible actions such as enhancing numerous public transportations and controlling the price of basic needs instead of encouraging societies to relocate to smaller regional towns.

Societies face many issues in metropolitan cities as traffic jams and quality of air pollution. In big cities, some roads are dominated by private cars, then the number of people using these private cars is higher than in other cities. As a result, there is a phenomenon like congestion in the road that can occur with long duration. Mostly, people who are workers have to go to office and back home regularly using private cars. This situation has a bad impact on utilizing time because they spend more time just on the road and have a chance of becoming late to go to office. Another problem that has influenced widely on people is reducing air quality. When individuals live in larger cities is a risk to the respiratory system, an individual usually takes breath frequently which contains more emissions produced by private cars. Thus, individuals are able to get some diseases such as asthma.

What authorities should do is to deliver better public transportation. These facilities have to consider integration on reaching some ways, an efficiency of time and cost of transportation. If the government ponders this solution, individuals will use this type of transportation. For instance, after the government applied an integration of public transportation in Bandung, societies directly used public transportation. Therefore, the number of private cars has dropped.

To sum up, congestion and quality of air quality are common issues in metropolitan cities. Considering encouraging relocation to smaller cities is not the best solution, but governments can tackle some problems regarding living in metropolitan cities through improving of public transportation.

Lời giải

Sample 1:

The relationship between equality and personal accomplishments has gained significant attention in the last few years. Some claim that a fair society can encourage their people to succeed as they treat everyone in the same manner, while others oppose that personal achievement as a result of success and failure is based on their merits. I firmly believe that a combination of both equal and individualistic approaches is the key to success.

To begin with, gender equality is not only a fundamental right but also a necessary foundation for a peaceful and prosperous life. It is quite essential to utilize the full human potential for sustainable development. For example, in western countries, women are equally respected and given opportunities as men. However, in middle east countries or Eurasia, they do not have the same mindset, and women are still referred to be inferior to men. We observe an understandable difference in both western and eastern countries’ prosperity which gives us an understanding of the egalitarian society’s role in giving equal opportunities to men and women, to rich and poor, to upper class and lower class.

On the other hand, an individualistic approach is the second step after getting equal opportunities from an egalitarian society as it only creates favourable conditions, but an individual is responsible for taking the opportunity and making an effort to achieve the goal for its positive outcome. If we take an example of the ranking scoreboard, it can help evaluate the individuals’ performances on their merits.

To conclude, both equality and personal success are interdependent. Giving equal opportunities to all individuals is the first step to fair inclusion, and individual performance is the second step to thriving.

Sample 2:

There is a strong interest in equality and personal achievement in today’s world. In my opinion, these terms are different from each other. There must be equality in human beings’ rights, but equality in achievement can not be considered fair.

There must be quality in education for each person irrespective of their religion or family status. Everyone has the right to get a good education, and the government should provide facilities so that education will be free for all. If it is not free, then it should be less cheap so that no one hesitates to get an education. For example, to get admission to a well-known school/college, sometimes we need to pay some extra money, and it is not a good sign in our society, and due to this, some students cannot afford their expenses and miss the chance to join their preferred institute.

On the other hand, equality in job achievement is not a good sign, and one should get a prize as per their merits. For example, IT sector jobs have different roles, and everyone employed has to work as per their task assignments. If we give equal importance to each one, then the one who is giving extra effort to the work will feel demotivated, affecting their performance. Also, if we give equal salary to each one, it may help maintain a good work environment, but it will be a disgrace for the one who has the highest knowledge compared to the others.

In conclusion, it is good to have equality in some areas, but we should also pay attention to people’s knowledge.

Sample 3:

According to the Ecological Systems Theory, the environment that a person lives in has the most significant influence on his/her personal development. Some argue that certain personal traits are closely associated with a person’s achievement. However, I will argue in this essay that social equality is the key to an individual’s success in general from two aspects: gender equality and education equality.

The roles that women play in societies often vary significantly among different regions of the world. Societies, that offer women more freedom in terms of educational and vocational choices, could possess more desirable opportunities to facilitate women in pursuing their dreams and achieving their potentials. Women in Australia, for example, where the equality between males and females is considerably advance, could be more likely to achieve higher personal successes than women in Pakistan where females often remain inferior to males in society.

Education equality is another effect that could largely influence on one’s accomplishment. As human society develops, the ability of literacy and the access to modern technologies become increasingly important in individuals’ personal development. Residents of regions where free fundamental education and better access to technologies, such as the internet and computers, are provided, could have increasing numbers of opportunities to exercise their personal traits, thus, to succeed in the fields of their choices.

To conclude, an egalitarian society can facilitate more achievements among individuals. The gender and education equalities are two fundamental ones that could ensure everyone in the society, both males and females, to have the relatively equal opportunity to succeed.

Sample 4:

The concern and ongoing debate in the relationship between equality and personal success have developed recently. Some are convinced that individuals have marvellous opportunities to gain their success in egalitarian societies where everyone is treated in the same manner no matter what their educational, economical and intellectual levels are. While the opponents conceive that the high level of attainment will happen only if the individuals are free to achieve both the success and failure based on their own capabilities. I entirely believe that there is a strong connection between equality and personal success and this essay aims to elaborate that the egalitarian society is the best option for people.

As the era is developing, some aspects among the general public are changing and equality is one of those aspects. The concept of equality has been spread in the whole world and it results in many successes in egalitarian communities. Egalitarian gives fantastic chance to people to gain their achievement since there is no restriction for people in order to reach their success. In this situation, skill and knowledge are the main factors to achieve it. In Indonesia, for example, it was hard for women to have positions in certain sectors such as politics and military because most people were convinced that it was not appropriate for women to become either politician or a defence personnel. Yet, as the people is more open-minded now, it is no longer an issue and women can achieve their success in any sectors based on their ability. Thus, the egalitarian trend has influenced the society’s achievement.

Besides, equal rights and opportunities trigger people to become more competitive in a positive way and have more spirit to achieve something. Furthermore, people can get motivation from their surrounding that has similar objectives. In a classroom, for instance, every pupil has the same rights to be the champ without be differentiated by the teacher. While the students are surrounded by spirited fellows, they will learn better. In this case, having equal opportunities and rights urge people to gain the best achievement. Therefore, egalitarian concepts provide more chance to every people to become successful.

In conclusion, equality motivates people to work together and help each other. In a society where discrimination is present, even based on people’s capability, greater good can never be achieved.

Sample 5:

Some people believe that an egalitarian society engenders greater personal achievements for its people. However, others reject this notion as they believe such achievements can only be obtained based on internal factors such as individual strengths. While there is a directly proportional relationship between equality and personal achievements, I only partly agree with this notion as equality can only contribute so much to an individual’s success.

Admittedly, a fair society does provide a good foundation for personal achievement. With every person being given the same opportunities and rights, everyone would have the appropriate foundation to try and excel at what they do. As such, people would likely be given the same career opportunities and privileges, which can facilitate an equal chance for success among them. The practicality of such a society can be seen in the case of Sweden and Norway, where tertiary education is provided equally and free of charge to citizens. With everyone being given the chance to pursue higher learning and by extension better job opportunities, the workforce of these two countries display a higher level of education and far better earnings compared to the average nation.

However, it is also my firm conviction that there are other individual factors contributing to personal accomplishments besides equality. This is because equality can only go so far as to offer an initial head start for people on the long road to greater accomplishment, which is not sufficient to guarantee their success. By contrast, individual qualities have a much more extensive and long-term impact on any individual’s career. Only with qualities such as perseverance and determination can a person be willing to try and fail over and over in order to gain experience and achieve what they want. This is precisely why among millions of people that are given an equal chance to succeed, only those who are truly determined and resilient can find success.

In conclusion, despite my acknowledgement of the positive relationship between an egalitarian society and the achievement of its people, I also contend that this correlation is limited due to the greater importance of individual merits. Since the prospect of an all-equal society is somewhat negligible, it is advisable that people strive to improve their personal qualities to stand a better chance of success.

Sample 6:

The connection between equality and personal success is a complex topic that has been extensively discussed. Some argue that individuals can accomplish more in societies that prioritize equal treatment, while others believe that personal achievement is only possible when individuals have the freedom to succeed or fail based on their abilities.

Some individuals argue that in egalitarian societies, people can achieve greater success. This is because when individuals are in a fair society, they can accomplish more with the assistance of others. Additionally, there are more opportunities available when society is fair in all aspects. An egalitarian society refers to a society where everyone is treated equally, regardless of their race, gender, religion, or age. For example, India is often seen as a representation of an egalitarian society due to its constitution and various practices that promote equality.

However, there are others who argue that individuals can only achieve significant personal success if they have the freedom to either succeed or fail based on their own abilities.  I personally share this viewpoint because in a society that is highly competitive, success can only be attained when individuals have the liberty to make their own choices. By being able to choose their own path and pursue their own aspirations rather than conforming to others' expectations, individuals can truly achieve self-fulfillment. This can only be accomplished through the utilization of one's full potential and dedication to hard work.

In conclusion, both viewpoints had equal advantages and disadvantages. However, I agree with the viewpoint that high levels of personal achievement are possible only if individuals are free to succeed or fail.

Sample 7:

An egalitarian society is one where all people are considered equal in everything such as rights and opportunities. For instance, education plays a crucial role in everyone’s life and their success. Everyone in society has the right to get free schooling, which is offered by the government of a nation. Personally, I believe that people living in such a society have the potential to accomplish more. 

Furthermore, attaining personal accomplishments will serve as a guide for enhancing ourselves and enable us to reach our utmost capabilities. Moreover, we can enhance different facets of our lives, including self-assurance, communication abilities, productivity, and more.

However, there are some individuals who hold the belief that individuals can only achieve high levels of personal success if they have the freedom to either succeed or fail based on their own abilities. I believe that equality does not hinder people's freedom to succeed or fail. In fact, I argue that individuals would be motivated and perform well in a society that promoted equality. Moreover, the inequality in a society will lead to social cohesion, negative impact on health and well being, economic growth, etc. 

To sum up, I think it is important to strike a balance between both perspectives as they have their own advantages and disadvantages. Also promoting equality in society can also positively impact an individual's personal accomplishments. 

Sample 8:

In today's world, the environment has a significant impact on people's growth in various ways. While some argue that personal success can only be attained when individuals have the freedom to succeed or fail based on their own abilities, I firmly believe that a fair society that highly values equality allows individuals to achieve even greater success.

Equality means that every individual should be considered of equal worth and should be treated fairly, regardless of their personal characteristics, skills, or way of life. This implies that everyone should have equal rights, opportunities, and be treated with the same level of respect. By promoting equality in society, individuals can benefit in various ways, including fair treatment, respect, access to opportunities, economic efficiency, and enhanced education. For instance, countries like Pakistan, Syria, Mauritania are considered as an unfair country because of various reasons, such as gender-based violence, discrimination. And in these countries still personal success is out of reach for women.

Furthermore, education significantly contributes to individual achievement. Despite the presence of social inequality, numerous countries continue to struggle with high levels of illiteracy. For example, nations such as Norway, North Korea, and Lithuania boast a 100% literacy rate, while countries like Niger, Armenia, and Azerbaijan have alarmingly high rates of illiteracy, with citizens unable to read, write, or comprehend. The disparity between possessing education and lacking it is immense, and it greatly impacts personal success.

To sum up, I firmly believe that people can accomplish greater things in a society that promotes equality. This is because when individuals have equal opportunities and fair treatment, they are able to achieve more.

Sample 9:

Many research studies have highlighted a causal connection between utopian societies and personal growth, which has prompted the contention that individuals can accomplish more in more egalitarian societies. In my opinion, one can only grow when given the liberty to commit to personal causes. 

A utopian society provides its constituents with sustenance but not necessarily individual growth. This can be evidenced both economically and socially. In developed countries, there is typically a social safety net in the form of food banks, soup kitchens, or free healthcare to support less privileged citizens. Though the unemployed or people living below the poverty line can rely on these benefits for sustenance, this arguably deprives individuals of personal incentives to exert themselves, find decent employment, and in part, escape from poverty. An egalitarian society can also stifle growth in the workforce. If companies around the world embraced a hypothetical system of equal pay for all employees, such a policy would likely cause economic stagnation, stifle innovation, damage companies’ reputations, and hamper personal motivation generally. 

As far as I am concerned, success is not linear, and one can only see high levels of achievement when granted the freedom to make mistakes. A relevant example would be Rishi Sunak, the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. He was born into humble beginnings with both parents originally immigrants from India who sought asylum in the UK for the promise of a better life. Though the UK welcomed the family as asylum seekers and provided Rishi with education opportunities, he still applied himself, studying earnestly at school, securing quality employment at investment banks, and later entering the political world. Despite an early defeat in his bid to become prime minister against Liz Truss, Rishi continued to persevere with his campaigns and political beliefs, and finally managed to ascend to the position of Prime Minister after several debates. Similar instances of success can be seen in all industries, but the overlapping commonality is the liberty to pursue one’s purposes and the freedom to fail. 

In conclusion, high achievers tend to be those who are free to pursue their personal causes despite the safety net provided by an egalitarian society. One should try to capitalise on all opportunities being presented. 

Sample 10:

In the present era, emphasis is increasing towards equality in society and achieving success. Some argue that chances of success are higher in a society where everyone has equal rights and opportunities. In contrast, others think that it would be more beneficial if people had the freedom to achieve or fail according to their results. I believe that an egalitarian society is better as every person has a chance to succeed, regardless of gender or background.

A fair society that supports talent has a chance to achieve growth much better than a biased society. If society is biased towards some cast or wealthy people, then the only people who can achieve success are the ones who belong to affluent families. However, children from wealthy families don’t need to have more talent. It depends on the dedication and hard work of individuals. Suppose each individual has given a chance, then people will put more effort into achieving something. For instance, if admission to the university depends upon how individuals perform in exams instead of their background, people would work hard to succeed.

Furthermore, if society is biased and does not allow everyone to grow, there would be no harmony among the individuals in society. Such a society will always face struggles, and nobody will feel happy in such an environment. When people in the community feel they are not given equal rights, they start protesting, which affects the peace. To cite an example, a few years ago Patel community gathered and demanded their cast to be included in the minority because they felt that their community was not getting the same opportunity as compared to other communities, which led to massive destruction in some states of Gujarat. Moreover, if people do not have equal rights, they prefer to migrate to a place where they have equal opportunities.

To conclude, having equal opportunity to succeed is a fundamental human right, and if society wants to achieve something, then it must be unbiased and preference given to deserving people, regardless of their gender or religion.

Sample 11:

It is an irrefutable fact that equality plays an essential role in societies. Some populace thinks that individuals can achieve more success in an egalitarian society. In contrast, others think that a high level of success depends on an individual’s merits, hard work and dedication. However, I firmly believe both equality and personal merits play paramount roles among people. This essay will analyze both views using examples to demonstrate points and prove arguments.

On the one hand, equality is essential in many aspects, such as men and women. In the past, only men tend to go to school or do work at the office, while nowadays, the majority of women work. Anyone has the right to have an education and work, whether poor or rich. In other words, people have to judge them on their talent, not on their social status or family status. For instance, many higher-level schools take donations in order to get admission to that school. Therefore, poor people cannot get admission because of the financial crisis. At this moment, the government should provide free or low-budget education so that everyone can get an education. Thus, equality plays a significant role in order to become successful.

On the other hand, individual achievement is equally important because, without failure, they cannot learn and achieve new things. To be more precise, failure is the key to success. If the person does not go through failure, they do not know the value of success. We learn lesions as well as mistakes through failures. Not only failure but hard work and dedication are also equally important. Everyone should get merits for their hard work. To exemplify, the IT sector’s job has different roles, and every employee has to work on the task assigned to them. If we give equal importance to each one, then the one who is giving extra will feel demotivated, affecting their performance. Another thing is that if we give equal salary to each one, it may help to maintain a good workplace environment but, it will be a dishonour for the one who has the highest knowledge compared to others. Hence, only equality in job achievement is not a good sign, and also one should get a prize as per their merits.

To sum up, promoting an egalitarian society motivates individuals to strive for personal excellence, but we should also pay attention to people’s knowledge. Hence, both are equally important to achieving achievements in their life.

Sample 12:

In recent decades, there has been considerable debate about whether or not individual achievement is greater in egalitarian or more hierarchical societies. In my opinion, despite the benefits of egalitarianism as a political principle, it should not be pursued as a social ideal.

Those who argue egalitarian societies are better for achievement point out the benefits of opportunity. The most well-known examples of this are in socialist nations in Europe like France where income disparity is less pronounced than in more capitalist countries. In such liberal countries, a person can receive a good education, secure stable employment, receive unemployment benefits in the case of an economic downturn, and support the rest of society by paying high taxes. Being part of such a community is itself a motivation for individuals to perform well at work and pursue life goals. This is especially the case as a person will not have to feel anxious about the possibility of being left behind by society at large.

I would contend that when conditions are generally equal individuals should then be permitted to compete without considerable governmental regulation. The standout example for this situation would be in the United States. Although there are more problems related to income inequality, there is also greater innovation across a variety of sectors. One cause of this is that individuals are motivated by the desire to excel and earn the financial rewards that accompany success. A person is therefore encouraged to attain their own definition of success, or they might be forced to live on the fringes of society.

In conclusion, though there is a cruel element to competition, it is the best way to encourage innovation and growth in an individual and society as a whole. Naturally, such an approach is only possible when systemic problems related to discrimination have first been eliminated.

Sample 13:

In my opinion, an egalitarian society is one in which everyone has the same rights and the same opportunities. I completely agree that people can achieve more in this kind of society.

Education is an important factor with regard to personal success in life. I believe that all children should have access to free schooling, and higher education should be either free or affordable for all those who chose to pursue a university degree. In a society without free schooling or affordable higher education, only children and young adults from wealthier families would have access to the best learning opportunities, and they would therefore be better prepared for the job market. This kind of inequality would ensure the success of some but harm the prospects of others.

I would argue that equal rights and opportunities are not in conflict with people's freedom to succeed or fail. In other words, equality does not mean that people lose their motivation to succeed, or that they are not allowed to fail. On the contrary, I believe that most people would feel more motivated to work hard and reach their potential if they thought that they lived in a fair society. Those who did not make the same effort would know that they had wasted their opportunity. Inequality, on the other hand, would be more likely to demotivate people because they would know that the odds of success were stacked in favour of those from privileged backgrounds.

In conclusion, it seems to me that there is a positive relationship between equality and personal success.

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