Câu hỏi:

09/01/2025 253

The only way to reduce the amount of traffic in cities today is by reducing the need for people to travel from home for work, shopping and education. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Quảng cáo

Trả lời:

verified
Giải bởi Vietjack

Sample 1:

The assertion that reducing the need for commutes for work, education, or shopping is the sole solution to urban traffic congestion is overly simplistic. This essay will argue that, although minimizing travel demands can indeed alleviate congestion, it is essential to also consider enhancing public transportation and developing pedestrian-friendly infrastructure as part of a comprehensive strategy.

Reducing the demand for daily commutes by promoting remote work, online education, and e-commerce initiatives can have a profound and transformative impact on urban traffic volumes. The global shift towards telecommuting, particularly highlighted during recent pandemics, has vividly demonstrated the potential for remote work arrangements to significantly lessen rush-hour congestion. Similarly, the burgeoning sector of online education offers a pragmatic solution to alleviate the need for students to traverse city streets daily, while e-commerce effectively reduces the frequency of shopping-related excursions. By substantially curbing the number of vehicles on the roads, these measures can lead to a more manageable traffic flow and, consequently, a notable reduction in vehicular emissions and related pollutants, contributing to a cleaner urban environment.

However, to regard these innovative solutions as panaceas would be an oversight. The complexity and multifaceted nature of urban traffic congestion demand a comprehensive approach that goes beyond simply reducing travel necessity. Investments in robust public transportation systems can provide a more sustainable, efficient alternative to private vehicle use, effectively reducing congestion while offering a reliable service. Moreover, the development of pedestrian and bicycle-friendly infrastructure not only encourages healthier, eco-friendly modes of transport but also enhances urban livability by promoting active lifestyles. Coupled with initiatives to promote remote activities, these strategies can collectively forge a more resilient and adaptable solution to the enduring challenge of traffic congestion, fostering a sustainable urban future that accommodates the growing demands of city dwellers.

In conclusion, while remote work, online education, and e-commerce significantly reduce urban traffic, a holistic approach including enhanced public transport and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure is vital. This comprehensive strategy can alleviate congestion and improve urban life, propelling cities towards greater sustainability and resilience.

Sample 2:

The prevailing notion that curbing the imperative for people to venture out for work, education, or shopping is the singular strategy to diminish urban traffic congestion calls for a comprehensive reevaluation. This essay posits that while minimizing travel necessity plays a crucial role, an integrated approach involving technological innovations and infrastructural enhancements is paramount.

The advent of telecommuting, digital learning platforms, and online shopping has undeniably lessened the vehicular load on city streets, significantly contributing to smoother traffic flow and a marked decrease in air pollution. Companies such as TeleTech have vividly illustrated how remote employment can drastically reduce the number of daily commuters, thus highlighting the potential for a significant environmental benefit. Moreover, educational platforms like Coursera and Udemy have not only revolutionized the education sector by enabling millions to learn from the comfort of their homes but also effectively mitigated the traditional morning academic rush. This transition towards virtual engagement has shown a sustainable path forward, demonstrating a notable decrease in the need for transportation and its associated emissions.

Nonetheless, solely depending on these modern conveniences to solve traffic congestion overlooks the issue's complexity. Integrating smart city technologies, such as real-time traffic management systems and AI-driven predictive analytics, can significantly streamline vehicular flow, thus alleviating congestion. Additionally, enhancing public transportation infrastructure to make it more reliable, efficient, and widespread, coupled with the creation of greener, pedestrian-friendly urban spaces, can promote a shift away from private vehicle dependency. These initiatives, aimed at improving urban mobility, underscore the necessity of adopting a broader perspective that includes not just remote work and digital platforms but also tangible improvements in city planning and infrastructure.

In summary, while leveraging telecommuting, online education, and e-commerce plays a crucial role in reducing urban traffic, a holistic approach incorporating smart technologies and the enhancement of public and non-motorized transport infrastructure is essential. This comprehensive strategy is not only more effective in tackling traffic congestion but also promotes a sustainable, livable urban environment, marking a progressive step towards a resilient and environmentally conscious future.

Sample 3:

There is a contentious issue whether the only solution to ease traffic congestion is to reduce the necessity for people to get to work, educational institutions and shopping malls. I strongly disagree with this statement, and I believe that the combined effort of advanced online communication that minimizes the need for physical transportation and other urban infrastructural development can reduce the amount of city traffic in a sustainable way.

Indeed, the crucial step to improve traffic conditions in megalopolises is to cut down the need for the population to travel to any place. This measure can be implemented by enabling them to work from home, providing online education, creating the opportunity to do the shopping on the Internet and order desired things straight to the doorstep. These initiatives might bring about improvements in road issues by easing pressure on public transport, making the environment in cities less polluted and relieving road congestion. Moreover, it will not only make a difference on the roads but will influence the overall lifestyle, because citizens will be able to devote more free time to personal needs, which was previously spent reaching their destinations.

However, there are more effective solutions which will enhance traffic and cut the quantity of cars. These can be the increase of prices for petrol, reconstruction of roads and installation of signposts or road signs. The higher charge for petrol is likely to discourage people from traveling, make them stay at home or, at least, budge on the decision to use public transport. Modernization of roads will expand road capacity and improve road junctions, and updated signposts and signs will assist drivers in passing problematic intersections faster.

In conclusion, I completely disagree that only cutting the need for communication would reduce the amount of city traffic, rather I believe that, along with establishing alternative online communication, a combination of governmental resolutions such as raising taxes for petrol, redesigning roads and putting up new signs will contribute effectively on reducing the load of urban traffic.

Sample 4:

It has been suggested that restricting the movement of individuals from home to work, shopping, and education is the only way to decrease traffic in urban areas. I completely disagree with the statement because there are other alternatives like building ring roads and encouraging public transport. These two methods will be stumbling blocks, but these ways will help reduce traffic.

To begin with, ring roads can be built to stop increasing traffic. To elaborate, individuals need to go to their workplace or to shop and attend schools or colleges. Limiting their frequency to move from one place to another will create only havoc. Therefore, constructing a ring road can work well. If ring roads are built, there will be no traffic in one place. People can easily reach their destination on time. It would be best to have this construction on the outskirts of urban areas. Thus, a city would be less noisy and serene. For example, in metropolitan areas, ring roads have reduced traffic, and individuals have taken a sign of relief as they do not hear loud horns and face long hours of traffic jams. This thing also has reduced the number of accidents on the road due to traffic congestion.

Moreover, encouraging public transport is another effective solution to curb traffic. To explain it, everyone now possesses a vehicle. So, they find it more convenient to go anywhere. But if public transport is modified with modern facilities, people would love to travel by it. As a result, the number of vehicles on the road will decline. This will not only be effective in reducing traffic but also make people socialize with others when they travel on a bus or a train. For instance, half the ticket price for regular commuters and comfortable seats with air conditioners in a bus can compel them to use it more frequently. If people are welcomed in a warm way, especially children, women, and oldsters, the bus or a train will be the first choice for everyone, and people will avoid using their vehicles. Consequently, traffic jams on roads will shrink.

To conclude, it is clear that making ring roads and promoting public transport are a few effective solutions to reduce traffic in cities. The reduction in traffic will not only be beneficial for our environment, but it also makes people socialize.

Sample 5:

In this dynamic era, the population is increasing dramatically, and with that, the needs of individuals have also increased. Many people use their private cars for comfort, like they don’t have to line up on public transportation, and many travel for work, study, or to buy something. If we want to reduce the traffic congestion in metropolitan areas. We need to spread awareness among individuals to use fewer private cars. I partially agree with this statement, and in the next few paragraphs, I explain this view.

On the one hand, it is a good option to ask people to use more public transportation because nowadays these modes of transport are available at a low cost and are easy to find. Moreover, not only does it benefit financially, but it also helps people interact with new individuals. In addition, for health purposes, we need to disseminate the use of bicycles. And it helps to control traffic and pollution. For instance, in Japan, their government provides bicycle facilities to every person in the state to travel a short distance. And this idea works to control the traffic in the country.

On the side of disagreement, for some reason, people with disabled abilities and senior citizens can’t use public transportation or bicycles, and they are tied up to use their private cars. Furthermore, in some emergencies, a personal vehicle is the best option. For example, when there is a conflict between the government and transportation workers, we are forced to use our vehicles.

In conclusion, to control the traffic, it is a good option to let individuals know to use government transport facilities. However, in some cases, elderly and disabled people, can’t use public transportation, so they need to use their private four-wheelers.

Sample 6:

In today’s world, traffic congestion in cities has become a major issue, causing frustration and wasted time for many people. Some argue that the only way to reduce this problem is by decreasing the need for people to travel for work, education, or shopping. I partially agree with this statement, but I believe there are other effective measures that can be taken to alleviate traffic congestion in cities.

Firstly, reducing the need for people to travel from home for work, education, or shopping can certainly have a positive impact on traffic congestion. With the advancements in technology, many companies and educational institutions have already implemented remote work and learning options, which have significantly reduced the number of commuters. Additionally, the rise of e-commerce has made it possible for people to shop from the comfort of their homes, further reducing the need for physical travel.

However, it is important to consider that not all professions or industries can fully adopt remote work. For example, essential workers such as healthcare professionals, emergency responders, and service industry employees must physically be present at their workplaces. Furthermore, face-to-face interaction and hands-on experience are crucial in certain educational fields, making remote learning less feasible.

In addition to reducing the need for physical travel, improving public transportation and infrastructure, implementing congestion pricing, and promoting alternative modes of transportation such as cycling and walking can also contribute to reducing traffic congestion in cities. By providing efficient and accessible public transportation options, cities can encourage people to leave their cars at home and opt for more sustainable modes of travel.

In conclusion, while reducing the need for people to travel from home for work, education, or shopping can help alleviate traffic congestion to some extent, it is not the only solution. Implementing a combination of measures, including improving public transportation and infrastructure, promoting alternative modes of travel, and embracing remote work and learning, can effectively reduce traffic congestion in cities.

Sample 7:

Some people arguably describe that cumulating traffic in our day-to-day life is the major problem in metros. The feasible solution for decreasing the ratio of traffic in urban areas is for individuals not to have to go out for their daily activities like jobs, studies, and markets. Is this always the case? I vehemently disagree with this notion because, in spite of completing activities at home, there are few feasible solutions for this scenario. In the forthcoming paragraphs, I will try to elaborate on my agreement and disagreement points with examples.

On the one hand, it is undoubtedly true that if individuals are ready to work, study at home and also follow online shopping strategies, the number of vehicles inroads is comparatively decreased. For example, during the Covid pandemic time, employees were restricted from travelling, pupils began online learning systems, and housemakers were part of the online purchase culture. This has helped both urban and sub-urban areas to reduce traffic conjunction, accidents and ailments. Apart from this, this culture will help organizations to reduce their cost in attainable ways.

On the other hand, as part of job nature and business matters, employees have to travel to all parts of the world, students want to go to their school for learning, and individuals have entered the market for their household chores. Nobody can jeopardize these activities in the name of traffic. These are our imperative daily activities. To reduce traffic in city areas, society should have classical infrastructure and roads, the same as in European or Gulf countries. This will help reduce the ratio of huge traffic sporadically.

Furthermore, classical road laws always help to curb the density of traffic in metros. As a developing country, these types of updated laws are part of the betterment of the development of society. Lastly, stringent actions should be taken against violators in urban areas. This will help to be a warm awareness to the public and also help to deterioration of traffic. For example, in GCC countries, traffic signal violators should get 48 hours of imprisonment without fail. The governments in GCC countries agree that these strict rules help them to hamper the violators, and they also help to reduce traffic accidents.

In conclusion, it is undoubtedly true that rather than restricting the public in their daily activities, it is advisable to serve them in effective ways. It will curb all the road catastrophes.

Sample 8:

The most workable way to solve the evergrowing traffic issue in metropolitan regions, according to a would be to decrease the taxpayer’s demand for traveling to offices, shopping malls, and colleges.

To begin with, all tasks can’t be performed from your home. Doctors, nurses, engineers, sales executives, and lots of other professionals need to see their offices and meet folks to perform their duties. In the same way, when we store online, shipping employees will still be on the path to deliver goods. Along with this, many specialist courses require field research and lab functions, and an internet class can’t offer such amenities. Online courses can’t be contrasted with classroom instruction, and the standard of the merchandise can’t be judged only by the images on a notebook or a telephone. Thus, people will need to find out to perform their everyday functions.

Additionally, if someone is restricted to a location to get quite a while to prevent being outdoors for their everyday requirements and professional responsibilities, he might create health issues – diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and feeble vision are just a few to mention.

To genuinely handle traffic congestion, we all want more realistic options than limiting people to remain inside. One such choice can be advancing public transport. The ease of people conveyance would dissuade many to utilize their automobiles, that’s the principal reason behind awful traffic in several cities. What’s more, the authorities can encourage folks to use an eco-friendly manner of transportation, such as the bike, by devoting another lane for them. Many Asian and European cities, as an instance, have different cycle lanes, and that was powerful in promoting environment-friendly automobiles and decreasing traffic congestion.

In summary, to minimize traffic jams, the authority must improve mass transport facilities and invite folks to use eco-friendly transports instead of intending to limit people’s moves.

Sample 9:

Traffic congestion is possibly a curse in several cities; also, it kills precious time on the one hand and also degrades people’s general productivity and financial advancement on the opposite side. Considering that the most crucial reason behind traffic gridlocks about the streets is that the overwhelming amount of folks who commute every day, restricting it into a sensible scope is the very best solution to suppress the lousy traffic.

Ironically, the city and government management cannot request taxpayers to remain inside and organize’work from home’ center for each and every professional as which makes it a law that would cause confusion and discontent. Moreover, individuals will need to acquire outdoors not just for their specialist, educational, and shopping requirements but to socialize and to get entertainments. Thus, limiting people’s obligation to sail daily seems to be an unrealistic notion for many.

But there are approaches to execute it without causing any ignorance and confusion among taxpayers and controlling the traffic issues at precisely the same moment. Because we must decrease the number of commuters and vehicles in the street, that’s the only viable alternative to traffic issues, and we could sort the professionals that will work at home and then disperse the facilities such as shopping centers, banks, and parks into all residential areas to ensure people may access them in walking distance. For example, IT professionals, attorneys, bookkeepers, client support agents, teachers, and other professionals don’t have to go to their workplace every day since they may execute the majority of their duties from the house with the assistance of technologies.

Additionally, improving a few centers and digitalizing lots of services may dissuade individuals from unnecessary daily commuting. For example, many parents traveling for their kids’ school every day to lose them and pick up them, and should colleges offer you convenient and safe transport centers, parents could rely upon this facility instead of traveling every day. In the same way, banking, utility charge, and help desk ought to be digitalized so that we can finish our jobs from home instead of seeing those offices.

In conclusion, traffic congestion from most cities is massive a problem the jurisdiction is fighting to maintain control. A high number of commuters, along with the vehicles that they use, would be the principal reason behind that, and it’s anticipated that the authorities would ease people so they should breathe less often.

Sample 10:

The most viable solution to the ever-growing traffic problem in urban areas, according to some, is to minimize the citizen's need for travel to workplaces, shopping malls and schools. However, I disagree with this viewpoint and in this essay, I will explain why I possess this view.
First, all professionals can not work from home. Doctors, engineers, bankers, nurses, sales executives and many other professionals have to visit their workplaces and meet people to execute their responsibilities. Similarly, if we shop online, dispatch staff will still be on the road to deliver products. In addition to this, many professional courses require field studies and laboratory work, and an online course cannot provide such facilities. Online courses cannot be compared with classroom teaching and the quality of the products cannot be judged just by the pictures on a laptop or a phone. Thus, people need to get outside to do their daily work.

To truly tackle traffic congestion, we need more realistic solutions than restricting people's movement. One such solution can be improving public transportation. The convenience of public conveyance would discourage many to use their private cars, which is the primary reason for bad traffic in many cities. Furthermore, the government can encourage people to use an eco-friendly mode of transport, like the bicycle, by dedicating a separate lane for them. Many European and Asian cities, for example, already have separate cycle lanes and this has been truly effective in promoting environment-friendly vehicles and reducing traffic congestion. We need to have effective ways to tackle traffic congestion rather than asking people to stay home.
In conclusion, in order to minimize traffic jams, the authority should enhance mass transportation facilities and encourage people to use eco-friendly transport rather than planning to restrict people's movements.

Sample 11:

Urbanization has brought the term traffic congestion into existence. A school of thought believes that traffic can only be controlled by limiting daily commuters' need for travel. However, I am not convinced that this is the only or the best way. Though it has some impact, other measures are required.

Apparently, reasons that substantiate the claim that "the less frequently people travel in a city, the fewer traffic jam they create" - require thorough analysis. Firstly, city dwellers commute daily primarily for their study, business, job, shopping and social needs. Some of these could be done from home as the advancement of technology has made it possible to learn, work and shop online. This will reduce traffic to a certain extent. To illustrate, a survey conducted by the Australian Traffic Authority outlines that 75% of commuters in private cars travel for shopping, job and education, and it is clear that if people can work from home, do online shopping and enrol in online courses, traffic congestion would be reduced, if not solved.

However, working from home is not permissible for a great number of professionals such as nurses, builders, doctors, police and so on. Therefore, they must travel to and from their workplaces daily. Moreover, online learning cannot replace the classroom-based education system, and online shopping is yet to substitute the traditional shopping method. Thus, it is evident that controlling the necessity of travel for the day-to-day activities of citizens is not the only way to manage traffic problems. Improving public transportation, carpooling and encouraging pedestrians and cyclists could be some great solutions.

To conclude, limiting city dwellers' needs for their daily commute may help control traffic problems to some extent, but other measures should be in place. The government should encourage people to use eco-friendly transportation like cycles to tackle bad traffic.

Sample 12:

The idea that the only way to reduce traffic in cities is to reduce the need for people to travel is a simplistic and unrealistic one. While it is true that reducing the number of trips people make each day would certainly help alleviate traffic congestion to some extent, it is not the only or even a practical solution to the growing traffic problem. In fact, there are several other effective strategies that can be employed to reduce traffic in cities, without necessarily reducing the need for travel.

A better way to reduce traffic is by improving public transportation. Many people prefer to drive their own vehicles because public transportation systems in many cities are unreliable, uncomfortable, and inconvenient. By investing in better public transportation systems, cities can encourage more people to use buses, trains, and other forms of mass transit, thereby reducing the number of cars on the road. Cities like Tokyo and New York have improved their traffic condition after investing heavily in their public transportation. So restricting people's movement is not required to reduce traffic jams.

Another effective strategy for reducing traffic than asking people to stay home is to encourage people to carpool. Carpooling reduces the number of cars on the road, thereby easing congestion and reducing air pollution. Cities can encourage carpooling by providing incentives such as priority parking spaces or reduced tolls for carpoolers. Finally, cities can also work to make walking and biking more feasible options for commuting. By creating safe and convenient bike lanes and pedestrian walkways, more people may be encouraged to walk or bike to work, thereby reducing the number of cars on the road. Additionally, cities can encourage the use of e-bikes and electric scooters to further reduce the need for cars.

In conclusion, reducing the need for people to travel is one of several strategies to reduce road traffic, but it is not even practical to implement. On the contrary, by improving public transportation, encouraging carpooling, and making walking and biking more feasible, cities can work towards a more sustainable and less congested future.

Sample 13:

In modern cities, traffic congestion is a substantial problem that causes delays, frustration, and pollution while also killing valuable manhours. Some people argue that the only solution to reducing traffic in cities is by reducing the need for people to travel from home to work, shopping, and education. I strongly agree with this viewpoint, and in this essay, I will explain why.

One of the main reasons why we need to reduce the need for people to travel is that the current transportation infrastructure cannot cope with the ever-increasing demand for travel. Building more roads and expanding public transportation systems are not feasible solutions in densely populated cities, and these measures often create new problems, such as increased air pollution and more congestion. Therefore, the best approach is to reduce the demand for travel by creating more opportunities for remote work, online shopping, and e-learning. We have already witnessed that this approach could be highly effective during the COVID-19 lockdown when people used to work, attend classes and shop online and stayed at home.

Moreover, reducing the need for people to travel can have numerous economic, social, and environmental benefits. For example, remote work can save commuters a significant amount of time and money spent on transportation, resulting in improved work-life balance and productivity. Online shopping and e-learning can provide more convenience and accessibility to people with limited mobility or living in remote areas. Additionally, reducing traffic can help to lower air pollution levels, improve public health, and enhance the overall quality of life in cities.

In conclusion, I strongly agree that the only and the best way to reduce traffic in cities is by reducing the need for people to travel from home to work, shopping, and education. By creating more opportunities for remote work, online shopping, and e-learning, we can enjoy numerous economic, social, and environmental benefits while alleviating traffic congestion and improving the overall quality of life in cities.

Sample 14:

Traffic congestion is perhaps a curse in many cities, and it kills valuable time on the one hand and degrades people's overall productivity and economic progress on the other hand. Since the main reason for traffic gridlocks on the roads is the overwhelming number of people who commute daily, limiting it to a reasonable extent is conceivably the best solution to curb the bad traffic.

Though the government and city administration can not ask citizens to stay indoors and arrange the "work from home" facility for every professional, there are ways to implement it without creating confusion and dissatisfaction among citizens and curbing traffic problems at the same time. Since we need to reduce the number of commuters and vehicles on the road, which is the only viable solution to traffic problems, we can sort out the professionals who can work from home and then distribute the facilities like shopping centres, parks and banks to all residential areas so that people can get them within walking distance. For instance, IT professionals, lawyers, bookkeepers, customer service representatives, instructors and similar other professionals do not need to travel to their office daily as they can execute most of their responsibilities from home with the help of technology. This way the road traffic could be reduced to a great extent.

Moreover, improving some facilities and digitalising many services can deter people from unnecessary daily commuting. For instance, many parents travel to their children's schools daily to drop them off and pick them up. If schools offer safe and convenient transportation facilities, parents would rely on such facilities rather than travelling daily. Similarly, banking, utility bill payment and help desk should be digitalised so that we can complete our tasks from home rather than visiting those offices. Thus, the movement of people would be restricted and the traffic problem would be reduced.

To conclude, traffic congestion in many cities is so big a problem that the authority is struggling to keep it under control. A large number of commuters and the vehicles they use are the primary reason for that, and it is expected that the government would facilitate people so that they need to commute less frequently.

Sample 15:

It is certainly true that today traffic in cities throughout the world has become a major problem. this is obvious from the number of vehicles on our roads and the amount of pollution they cause. probably the traffic problem is due to individuals traveling for work, study or shopping purposes, and this is evident in the rush hours we experience every evening and morning.

It is also true that today such daily commuting is not always necessary because people can do these things from home. we can see this in the options information technology gives us today. for instance, online work, distance learning, and shopping facilities are all available via the internet.

However, even if everyone had access to the technology and the opportunity to work from home, it is unrealistic to think that everyone would want to. even though the technology for working, studying or shopping online makes this option a possibility, nevertheless, it would mean people had less freedom of choice and less social contact in their lives. this would have a large impact on society as a whole.

In conclusion, while this practice could reduce the traffic problem in our cities, it is most unlikely to be an acceptable solution. in terms of other solutions, perhaps we need to think more carefully about facilitating public transport and limiting private cars in our city centers. the development of public transport that is not road based, such as sky trains or subways, would probably be a more acceptable alternative measure to reduce jams on our roads.

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