Câu hỏi:
10/01/2025 188The chart below shows the annual pay (thousands of US dollars) for doctors and other workers in seven countries in 2004.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. Write at least 150 words.
Câu hỏi trong đề: 2000 câu trắc nghiệm tổng hợp Tiếng Anh 2025 có đáp án !!
Quảng cáo
Trả lời:
Sample 1:
The bar chart gives information about the yearly salaries of doctors compared to other professions across various countries in 2004.
Overall, the US was the top payer for both doctors and other workers, while salaries in Italy, the Czech Republic, and Germany were relatively similar. Additionally, doctors received significantly higher annual pay than people doing other jobs in all given countries.
In terms of the annual salary of doctors, the United States topped the list with a substantial $120,000 per year, followed distantly by France and Switzerland, where these health professionals made the same amount of $70,000 annually. Meanwhile, those working in Italy, the Czech Republic, and Germany had annual earnings of approximately $60,000, about $10,000 higher than that of Finnish doctors.
Although the US saw the largest pay gap between their doctors and other workers, the latter were still the biggest earners among those in other countries, earning just above $40,000. Swiss workers of other professions were remunerated slightly lower, as they made exactly $40,000. Notably, there was no pay difference between Italian, Czech, and German workers, all of whom earned $20,000. Finally, a close similarity can be seen in the remuneration for non-doctor professionals in France and Finland, with respective figures of roughly $30,000 and $25,000.
Sample 2:
The chart demonstrates the yearly pay for doctors and other workers in seven different nations in 2004 in thousands of USD.
Overall, it is immediately obvious that doctors make more than any other profession in these countries. Furthermore, the average salary for American workers, both for doctors and other professions, outstrips every other country.
With regards to doctors’ pay, the US ranks first at an average of 120 000 USD, being significantly higher than the countries in joint second place of Switzerland and France, where doctors earn around 70 000 USD. Conversely, doctors in Finland earn the least at only 50 000 USD annually, 10 000 lower than the second lowest pay for doctors, that of Italy, at 60 000 USD.
As for the salary for other professions, it is again highest in the US, where average pay is around 45 000 USD. Meanwhile, Switzerland ranks second at 40 000 USD, while France is third at 30 000 USD. Germany, the Czech Republic and Italy all share the bottom position, paying their non-doctors a measly 20 000 USD on average.
Sample 3:
The bar chart gives information about the salary of doctors and other workers in seven countries in 2004.
Overall, it can be seen that the US paid the highest salary for both doctors and other workers. In addition, doctors received higher pay than people doing other jobs in all 7 countries.
In 2004, France and Switzerland paid an equal amount of money for their doctors, at 70,000 dollars, while the salaries of other workers were only about 30,000 dollars in France and 40,000 in Switzerland. In a similar fashion, doctors in Italy, Czech, Germany received around 60,000 dollars for their work, three times as much as the salary of other workers.
120,000 dollars was the salary of doctors in the US in 2004, nearly triple the payment of doctors in Finland. People doing other occupations in the US were also paid higher than their Finnish counterparts – 40,000 dollars compared to just less than 30,000 dollars.
Sample 4:
The bar chart compares seven countries regarding the yearly payment for doctors and other jobs in the year 2004.
It is clear that doctors generally made more money than other types of work in each country during the research period. Also, the average incomes of American doctors and other workers were the highest among the seven nations.
The US doctors earned the largest amount of money compared to those in the other six countries, receiving nearly $120,000, while the figures for Switzerland and France were significantly lower, at close to 70,000 each. In contrast, there was only about $50,000 earned by doctors in Finland, as opposed to doctors in the other countries, who received around $61,000 each.
Regarding the average salaries of other workers, the amount of money earned by other workers in the US, at approximately $45,000 and in Switzerland, at exactly $40,000 was higher than in any of the other nations. Roughly $30,000 was given to French other workers, about $5,000 higher than that of Finnish counterparts. By contrast, the figures for the remaining countries were lowest, at exactly $20,000 each.
Sample 5:
The bar chart compares the yearly salary of doctors and other workers in several countries in the year 2004.
Overall, it is clear that the pay of US doctors was much higher than that of doctors in other countries. In each country, the annual salary of doctors was far higher than that of other workers.
The annual pay of doctors in the US was $120,000, whereas in Finland doctors received a comparatively low yearly salary of $50,000. In France, and Switzerland doctors earned $70,000 per year, compared with around $60,000 annually in Italy, Germany and the Czech Republic.
In contrast, the annual wages of other workers were much lower, at about $45,000 and $40,000 in the US and Switzerland, respectively. Other workers in France earned $30,000, a little more than other workers in Finland, who had an annual salary of $25,000. The lowest annual earnings were for other workers in Italy, Germany and the Czech Republic, at exactly $20,000.
Sample 6:
In 2004, the bar graph compares the annual earnings of doctors and employees in other professions in seven different countries. Overall, doctors earned significantly more than employees in other fields, with disparities varying greatly across countries. Doctors and other workers were paid the most in the United States.
It is noticeable that the average salary of an Italian, Czech, and German doctor was three times that of a worker in other fields, with figures ranging between 60 and 20 thousand US dollars. In Finland, the pattern was slightly different, with doctors earning around $55,000, which was more than double the figure for other workers, who earned $25,000.
Doctors in France and Switzerland earned roughly the same amount of money that year, while workers in other fields earned significantly less.
In terms of the US labor force, an average American doctor and worker were paid the most per year, receiving 120 thousand US dollars and just over a third of this, respectively.
Sample 7:
The provided bar chart presents a comparison of the annual salaries of doctors and other workers in multiple countries for the year 2004.
In general, it’s evident that doctors in the United States received significantly higher salaries compared to their counterparts in other nations. Furthermore, doctors in all the featured countries earned considerably more than other workers.
Specifically, doctors in the United States enjoyed an annual income of $120,000, while their counterparts in Finland received a notably lower yearly wage of $50,000. Meanwhile, doctors in France and Switzerland earned $70,000 annually, in contrast to approximately $60,000 per year in Italy, Germany, and the Czech Republic.
On the flip side, the yearly wages of other workers were notably lower, standing at approximately $45,000 and $40,000 in the United States and Switzerland, respectively. In France, other workers earned around $30,000, slightly more than their Finnish counterparts, who had an annual salary of $25,000. The lowest annual earnings were observed among other workers in Italy, Germany, and the Czech Republic, all of whom earned exactly $20,000 annually.
Sample 8:
The bar chart provides a comparative analysis of seven countries with respect to the annual income of doctors and other occupations in the year 2004.
It is evident that, in each of the countries examined, doctors generally commanded higher incomes than individuals in other professions during the study period. Furthermore, the United States emerged as the country with the highest average earnings for both doctors and other workers among the seven nations.
In the case of doctors, the United States took the lead with doctors earning the most substantial income, nearly reaching $120,000, whereas Switzerland and France reported considerably lower figures, at approximately $70,000 each. Conversely, doctors in Finland earned approximately $50,000, notably lower than their counterparts in the other countries, who averaged around $61,000 each.
Sample 9:
The provided bar chart illustrates the annual salaries for doctors and other types of workers in seven nations in the year 2004, with the figures presented in thousands of US dollars.
In summary, doctors across all seven countries earned higher salaries compared to other types of employees, and the United States boasted the highest incomes for both professions when compared to the other nations.
Specifically, doctors in France and Switzerland received an identical annual salary of $70,000. There were slight variations in the earnings of doctors in Italy, the Czech Republic, and Germany, with variances of approximately 2 to 3 thousand dollars. American doctors, in contrast, earned a substantial $120,000, which was nearly three times the salary of Finnish doctors.
For other members of the workforce, Italians, Czechs, and Germans all earned a uniform wage of $20,000. The annual income for workers in France and Finland stood at $30,000 and $25,000, respectively. In Switzerland, employees received $40,000 per year, while workers in the United States earned $5,000 more than their Swiss counterparts.
Sample 10:
The bar chart provides a visual representation of the annual salaries for doctors and other workers in seven countries in the year 2004.
Overall, it is evident that in 2004, the salaries of doctors in these seven countries were substantially higher than the earnings of individuals in other professions. Notably, the United States stood out as the nation with the highest income for employees when compared to the other countries.
Specifically, in 2004, the average income for medical professionals in almost all the featured countries exceeded 60,000 US dollars. The United States led the pack, with doctors earning an impressive 120,000 US dollars annually, while Finland reported the lowest income for doctors, at only 45,000 dollars in the same year. Switzerland and France followed closely with an annual salary of 65,000 dollars for medical professionals.
On the contrary, the earnings of other workers in these countries were considerably lower. The United States continued to lead in this category, with an approximate 42,000 US dollars paid to professionals in fields other than medicine in 2004. In contrast, companies in the Czech Republic, Germany, and Italy paid less than half of this amount, with average annual incomes of 20,000 US dollars, in stark contrast to the American figures.
Sample 11:
The bar chart provides a visual representation of the annual salaries of doctors and other workers in seven countries in the year 2004.
In general, it is evident that in 2004, doctors in these seven different countries earned significantly higher salaries compared to those in other professions. Notably, the United States emerged as the country with the highest income for employees when compared to the rest of the nations.
During 2004, the average income for medical professionals in nearly all the countries featured exceeded 60,000 US dollars. The United States led the pack, with doctors earning a substantial estimated amount of 120,000 US dollars annually. In contrast, the average income for doctors in Finland was the lowest among the countries, standing at only 45,000 dollars for the year in question. Switzerland and France came in second, with doctors in these countries earning an annual salary of 65,000 dollars.
Sample 12:
The provided bar graph offers data on the salaries of doctors and other laborers in seven different countries: France, Italy, Czech Republic, Germany, Finland, Switzerland, and the United States in the year 2004. Upon initial examination, it is apparent that doctors in all seven countries earned significantly higher incomes than other workers. Furthermore, the United States emerged as the country with the highest earnings in both the medical profession and other occupations.
Upon closer examination, it becomes evident that doctors in most of the countries received salaries that were more than twice the earnings of other laborers, with the exception of Switzerland, where doctors earned around $70,000 while other workers received $40,000. In Italy, the Czech Republic, and Germany, the income of other laborers was only about one-third of what their counterparts in the medical profession earned. On average, non-medical workers earned approximately $20,000, while doctors earned over $60,000 each.
Turning to American doctors, they garnered the highest incomes among the seven countries, with an annual income of $120,000. In parallel, other workers in the United States also had the highest income among all seven countries, with slightly over $40,000, signifying that doctors earned three times the income of other laborers.
Sample 13:
The provided bar chart offers a comparison of seven countries concerning the annual earnings of doctors and other job categories in the year 2004.
It is evident that doctors generally command higher salaries than those in other professions in each country during the study period. Additionally, both American doctors and other workers held the highest average incomes among the seven nations.
In the United States, doctors earned the highest income compared to their counterparts in the other six countries, with an annual income of nearly $120,000, while Switzerland and France reported notably lower figures, at approximately $70,000 each. In contrast, doctors in Finland earned around $50,000, as opposed to doctors in the other featured countries, who received an average of approximately $61,000 each.
Shifting the focus to the average salaries of other workers, the earnings of these workers in the United States, at roughly $45,000, and in Switzerland, at exactly $40,000, exceeded those of the other nations. French other workers earned approximately $30,000, which was about $5,000 higher than the earnings of their Finnish counterparts. In contrast, the figures for the remaining countries were the lowest, at exactly $20,000 each.
Sample 14:
The bar chart provides information about doctors’ and other workers’ salaries per year in seven distinct countries in 2004. Overall, the annual salary of doctors is always bigger compared to other professions.
In the US, a doctor’s income per year is 125 thousand dollars which is more than two times other workers’ annual pay that is just under 50 thousand dollars. Other countries also show a similar pattern between doctors’ and other occupations’ annual pay. Italy, the Czech Republic, and Germany have nearly identical conditions which is a doctor’s yearly salary is twice of other jobs’ income in one year.
Finlandia is the country that has the lowest doctor’s income compared to another occupation salary yearly among the seven countries, but doctors’ annual earnings are still twice of other jobs’ annual wages. There is only one exception which is in Switzerland that doctor’s annual take-home pay did not reach two times of other kinds of job annual earnings.
Sample 15:
The provided bar chart compares seven nations based on the annual salaries of doctors and other workers in the year 2004.
Clearly, doctors in each of the seven countries earned significantly more than other types of work during that particular year. Additionally, the United States stood out as the nation with the highest average incomes for both doctors and other workers among these countries.
In the United States, doctors earned the highest income, approximately $120,000, significantly surpassing the earnings of doctors in the other six nations. In contrast, doctors in Switzerland and France received substantially lower salaries, at around $70,000 each. Conversely, doctors in Finland earned a modest $50,000, contrasting with their counterparts in other countries who earned approximately $61,000 each.
When considering the average salaries of other workers, the income for other workers in the United States was approximately $45,000. In Switzerland, it reached exactly $40,000, which was higher than in the remaining nations. French other workers received around $30,000, which was about $5,000 more than their Finnish counterparts. On the contrary, the figures for other countries were consistently lower, remaining at exactly $20,000 each.
Sample 16:
The provided bar graph displays the annual compensation for doctors and other occupations in seven countries in the year 2004. In a broader context, the United States, France, and Switzerland had the highest salaries for doctors, while Finland had the lowest. Similarly, in the United States, Switzerland, and France, other jobs had the highest pay, while Germany, the Czech Republic, and Italy had the lowest salaries.
The United States led the way with a doctor’s salary of $120,000, followed by France in the second position with nearly $70,000, and Switzerland in the third position. Finland had the lowest doctor’s compensation among the countries.
For other job categories, the United States, Switzerland, and France had the highest salaries in proportion, while Germany, the Czech Republic, and Italy had similar and the lowest compensation among all the countries.
Sample 17:
The bar chart compares the payment each year for doctors and other workers in different nations in 2004.
Overall, the US paid the largest annual salary for both positions and also recorded the widest gap between these two figures. It also can be seen that doctors’ salaries were higher than other workers’ in both seven countries.
Regarding the chart, in 2004, annual payment for doctors in the US was 120 thousand US dollars, which nearly tripled the amount of money that other workers received. The figure for doctors in France and Switzerland were equal, at about 70 thousand US dollars, but other workers in former were paid lower than in the latter, at nearly 30 and 40 thousand US dollars respectively.
In Germany and Czech, doctors were offered roughly 65 thousand US dollars each year, compared to 60 in Italy. The lowest salary for this job was found in Finland, with only 50 thousand US dollars. Meanwhile, this nation offered a higher annual payment for other workers, at bout 25 thousand US dollars, than in Italy, Czech and Germany where they were offered equally, at 20 thousand US dollar.
Sample 18:
The bar chart illustrates how much money doctors and other workers were paid annually in seven different nations in 2004.
It was evident that doctors consistently earned more than their counterparts in other professions across all seven surveyed countries. Additionally, both American doctors and other workers received higher salaries than those in the remaining regions.
Firstly, the salaries of doctors in France and Switzerland were identical, reaching 70,000 US dollars per year, while the salary for other professions in Switzerland was only 40,000 and in France was just under 30,000. Secondly, there was also a similar pattern in doctors' salaries in Italy, Czech Republic, and Germany, where doctors earned approximately 60,000 US dollars per year. That amount was three times higher than the salary for other workers, set at 20,000 US dollars.
Additionally, the salary gap between doctors and other workers was notably wide in the United States. Among seven countries, the States led with the highest average doctor salary of 120,000 US dollars per year, nearly three times higher than other workers. In contrast, doctors in Finland reported the lowest payment, averaging just over 50,000 US dollars per year, less than nearly threefold the money offered in the United States.
Hot: 500+ Đề thi thử tốt nghiệp THPT các môn, ĐGNL các trường ĐH... file word có đáp án (2025). Tải ngay
CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ
Lời giải
Sample 1:
Many young people work on a voluntary basis, and this can only be beneficial for both the individual and society as a whole. However, I do not agree that we should therefore force all teenagers to do unpaid work.
Most young people are already under enough pressure with their studies, without being given the added responsibility of working in their spare time. School is just as demanding as a full-time job, and teachers expect their students to do homework and exam revision on top of attending lessons every day. When young people do have some free time, we should encourage them to enjoy it with their friends or to spend it doing sports and other leisure activities. They have many years of work ahead of them when they finish their studies.
At the same time, I do not believe that society has anything to gain from obliging young people to do unpaid work. In fact, I would argue that it goes against the values of a free and fair society to force a group of people to do something against their will. Doing this can only lead to resentment amongst young people, who would feel that they were being used, and parents, who would not want to be told how to raise their children. Currently, nobody is forced to volunteer, and this is surely the best system.
In conclusion, teenagers may choose to work for free and help others, but in my opinion, we should not make this compulsory.
Sample 2:
Some individuals nowadays feel that youngsters should accomplish unpaid volunteer work in their leisure time for the benefit of society. I completely believe that it is critical to involve children in volunteer activity. The primary issues will be discussed with examples in this essay.
To begin with, teenagers who participate in unpaid employment are more responsible for local society. When adolescents interact with other individuals, they become aware of the issues that people face daily, such as poverty, pollution, and others. Furthermore, we have all been affected by the present COVID-19 outbreak, and many people have suffered a loss. According to "The Voice of Vietnam - VOV” a volunteer who is anti-virus and empathizes with the mental pain that the patients are experiencing, he always gives oxygen and food to those who need it the most. As a result, volunteering helps students become the most responsible citizens in the country.
Furthermore, unpaid employment can assist youngsters in broadening their social contacts and developing soft skills. Because when they work in an unpaid job, they will meet a variety of individuals and acquire a range of skills and abilities from others, such as leadership, teamwork, communication, and dealing with challenging situations. For example, a recent study in Japan discovered that students who participate in volunteer work are more sociable, enthusiastic, and tolerant of others. They will grow more extroverted, energetic, and hard-working as compared to youngsters who do not perform unpaid employment.
To conclude, I feel that rather than paying, young people should perform unpaid social work because they can acquire many important skills and are more responsible to society.
Sample 3:
There is a growing debate about whether all adolescents should be asked to perform mandatory volunteer work in their leisure time to help assist the surrounding area. Although there are a variety of benefits associated with this topic, there are also some notable drawbacks, as will now be discussed.
The advantages of teenagers doing voluntary work are self-evident. The first relevant idea is work experience. A valid illustration of this would be to increase their tangible skills. For example, an adolescent who volunteers to help in a customer service department will learn how to communicate effectively with people in different age groups. On a psychological level, the youth’s life skills will also be enhanced by having empathy towards others. This can be demonstrated by volunteering and assisting families living in low socio-economic backgrounds with their day-to-day tasks.
There are, however, also drawbacks that need to be considered. On an intellectual level, the teenager may get distracted from their study. This situation, for instance, can be seen when voluntary work is also being undertaken during school terms. There would be time constraints for both areas. On a physiological level, youth might experience fatigue as they are unaware of the acceptable working or volunteering hours and, as a result, sometimes they can be overworked.
In summary, we can see that this is clearly a complex issue as there are significant advantages and disadvantages. I personally believe that it would be better not to encourage the youths to do compulsory work because their studies might take them to a higher level in society, whereas volunteering could restrict this progress.
Sample 4:
Children are the backbone of every country. So, there are people who tend to believe that youngsters should be encouraged to initiate social work as it will result in flourished society and individualistic growth of youngsters themselves. I, too, believe that this motivation has more benefits than its drawbacks.
To begin with, social work by children can be easily associated with personality development because, during this drive, they tend to communicate with the variety of people, which leads to polished verbal skills. For example, if they start convincing rural people to send their children to school, they have to adopt a convincing attitude along with developed verbal skills to deal with the diverse kinds of people they encounter. This improved skill will help them lifelong in every arena. Apart from this, the true values of life like tolerance, patience, team spirit, and cooperation can be learned. Besides that, young minds serve the country with full enthusiasm that gives the feeling of fulfillment and self-satisfaction. This sense of worthiness boosts their self-confidence and patriotic feelings. Moreover, experiencing multiple cultures and traditions broadens their horizons and adds another feather to their cap.
However, it is truly said, no rose without thrones. Can the drawbacks of this initiation be ignored? Children go to school, participate in different curriculum activities, endure the pressure of peers, parents, and teachers and in the competitive world, they should not be expected to serve society without their self-benefits. This kind of pressure might bring resentment in their mind.
In conclusion, I believe, the notion of a teenager doing unpaid work is indeed good but proper monitoring and care should be given to avoid untoward consequences.
Sample 5:
Youngsters are the building blocks of the nation and they play an important role in serving society because at this age they are full of energy not only mentally but physically also. Some people think that the youth should do some voluntary work for society in their free time, and it would be beneficial for both of them. I agree with the statement. It has numerous benefits which will be discussed in the upcoming paragraphs.
To begin with, they could do a lot of activities and make their spare time fruitful. First of all, they can teach children to live in slum areas because they are unable to afford education in schools or colleges. As a result, they will become civilized individuals and do not indulge in antisocial activities. By doing this they could gain a lot of experience and become responsible towards society. It would be beneficial in their future perspective.
In addition to this, they learn a sense of cooperation and sharing with other people of the society. for instance, they could grow plants and trees at public places, and this would be helpful not only to make the surrounding clean and green but reduce the pollution also to great extent. Moreover, they could arrange awareness programmes in society and set an example among the natives of the state. This will make the social bonding strong between the individuals and this will also enhance their social skills.
In conclusion, they can “kill two birds with one stone” because it has a great advantage both for the society and for the adolescents. Both the parents, as well as teachers, should encourage the teens to take part in the activities of serving the community in their free time.
Lời giải
Sample 1:
Everyone has different dreams when it comes to where they wish to live. Personally, I think it is very desirable to live in a large city. I feel this way for two reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.
To begin with, cities offer a great environment for raising children, and I am a person who values family above all else. Urban areas have numerous parks and recreation centers which encourage children to lead vital and healthy lives, and they also have well-funded community centers which contribute to the intellectual development of young people. My own experience demonstrates the value of such facilities. Both my husband and I work full time jobs and are not home when our two sons finish school. This is not a problem, though, as both of them go directly to a local community center when their classes are over. Our eldest son participates in a computer club there, while our youngest son practices photography. Their participation in these programs sets my mind at ease, as without access to the community center they would just sit at home all alone. This situation compares favorably to a friend of mine who lives in a small town and recently had to hire an expensive babysitter to watch her children when they get home from school, as she was not able to locate any meaningful activities for them to take part in.
Secondly, large cities offer cultural experiences that adults can enjoy and appreciate. Most major cities have a plethora of museums, ethnic restaurants, libraries, theater groups and other stimulating and cosmopolitan facilities. My city is no exception. For instance, my colleagues and I spend every Friday evening visiting a new ethnic restaurant for dinner. Over the past three months we have enjoyed food from more than a dozen different national cuisines. Meanwhile, my sons and I go to a different museum once a month and I have found that I enjoy our visits almost as much as they do. These are the sort of outings that are only possible in a heavily populated urban area. Small towns offer easy access to beautiful natural scenery, but I prefer the intellectual and cultural stimulation that my city offers.
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that living in a large city is preferable to living in a small town. This is because cities are better places to raise children, and because they offer stimulating intellectual and cultural experience that grown-ups can enjoy.
Sample 2:
I grew up in a small town and then moved to a big city, so I have experienced the good and bad
sides of both. I never thought that I would like to live in a big city, but I was wrong. After ten years of living in one, I can't imagine ever living in a small town again.
Small towns and big cities both have some problems in terms of transportation. In a small town, you have to own a car to ensure comfortable living. You can't get around without one because
there isn't any kind of public transportation. Big cities generally have heavy traffic and expensive
parking, but there you have a choice of taking public transportation. It's not free, but it's often cheaper than driving when you consider gas and time. Especially if you don't have a car, you're
better off in the city.
I love the excitement of big cities. Small towns have a slow pace. Large cities mean you have to
adapt to a variety of situations, like finding a new route to work or trying a new restaurant. I enjoy that challenge very much. Another source of the excitement of city living is the variety of cultural activities available. There is a wide assortment of theatre, music and dance performances
available in big cities. These things are rare in small ones.
The final thing I like about large cities is the diversity of the people. The United States is made up of people of different races, religions, abilities, and interests. However, you seldom find such a variety of people in a smaller town. I think that living in an area where everyone was just like me would quickly become boring.
Of course, security is a concern, and that's one area where small towns are superior to big cities.
Still, I would rather be a bit more cautious and live in a large city than feel secure but bored.
Sample 3:
Where should we live? Some may choose to live in big cities, while others like the natural and quiet surroundings in the countryside. As far as I am concerned, I would like to live in a big city because living in a big city has more advantages than living in the countryside.
To begin with, the city is the symbol of human civilization and there are many facilities for living, recreation and health care. Therefore, living there is more convenient than living in countryside. For example, we can find plenty of malls around our neighborhood, where we can buy everyday necessities at a low price. Furthermore, people are more concerned about their health and safety than other things in their lives. In big cities, medical facilities and emergency services are more easily accessible than in the countryside. Big cities also have convenient transportation and utility systems. They also offer faster Internet connections. These all make our life easier in big cities.
In addition, we can take part in a variety of events in big cities. Human beings like to live together and need to interact with each other. In a big city, the population density is high therefore there are always plenty of social activities, sports events and concerts. There are more recreational places in big cities, such as opera houses, movie theatres, clubs, and swimming pools. You will have many kinds of entertainment in big cities and meet many people. In the countryside, however, life may be dull and quiet, and you may only have a few neighbors. Living alone with few activities can easily cause mental diseases.
Some may argue that the pollution in cities makes people sick. However, with automobiles and modern highways we can easily take a break to expose ourselves to fresh air in the countryside and sunshine on the beach.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that living in big cities is much better than living in countryside because of the advanced facilities and social activities in cities. Moreover, the autos and highways
enable us to enjoy the natural and quiet surroundings in the countryside.
Sample 4:
In our modern world, people have different opinions on where the best place would be to live, and many argue that living in a small town is the ideal location, while others argue that living in a big city is preferred. Both places have their benefits and drawbacks, but I would prefer to live in a big city. This is because big cities offer diverse job opportunities, cultural experiences, and convenient amenities.
Big cities have a broader range of job opportunities than small towns. In a big city, one will have a chance to secure a job in various sectors and pursue a career. Many big companies and industries are typically located in larger cities, which means that job seekers have plenty of options. Moreover, a big city offers numerous opportunities for growth, as one can change jobs and pursue their passion. The job market in big cities also offers higher salaries and better benefits. Hence, for those who want to make a radicle career change and those who want to earn a decent living, a big city is the ideal place to live.
Cultural experiences are another reason why I prefer to live in a big city. Big cities offer diverse and unique cultural experiences that small towns
cannot, such as trying new foods and attending cultural festivals. In big cities, there is always a movie or a theatre show to attend, a concert or sporting event to watch, a museum or an art gallery to visit. The diversity of cultural experiences in big cities provides people with various opportunities to learn and broaden their horizons, which is an enriching experience.
Convenient amenities are also reasons why I prefer to live in big cities. Cities are often equipped with modern infrastructure. Cities have better medical facilities, public transportation systems, and essential services like banks and grocery stores. Big cities have a good public transportation system that is well-planned and suitable for people who do not own private cars. People in big cities have access to modern medical facilities with well-trained medical specialists.
Despite the benefits, big cities have some drawbacks. One of the most significant drawbacks is the high cost of living. Housing and rent are expensive in larger cities compared to small towns. Moreover, noise pollution and air pollution are common in big cities. Residents must always be aware of their surrounding environments to protect themselves from the effects of pollution. Additionally, congestion and crowding are other issues that plague many big city neighborhoods.
In conclusion, while big cities have their issues, I believe that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Big cities offer more job opportunities, an array of cultural experiences, and convenient amenities. Therefore, for me, getting the chance to live and experience all of this makes living in a big city very appealing.
Sample 5:
People seldom agree with one another, even on such trivial issues as the preference between living in a big city and a small town. It’s a bit hasty to claim that it is better to live in a big city than in a small town, or vice versa.
Living in a big city has several benefits. First, there are more job opportunities readily available in big cities compared to small towns. Furthermore, not only are there more job positions in big cities, but the quality of these positions is much higher as well. In addition, the pay is often more competitive.
Second, children are likely to receive a higher-quality education compared to their counterparts in small towns. For families, children’s education is always a top priority.
Finally, big cities generally offer a superior overall standard of living compared to small towns. There are more commodities and services available in city markets, more public utilities, and even a greater variety of television channels.
However, living in a small town also has its advantages. People in small towns often enjoy a more comfortable lifestyle. Most are free from the high work-related stress common in big cities. Although the average pay is lower, the cost of daily necessities, such as vegetables and meat, is usually more affordable.
Instead of experiencing the loneliness often prevalent in big cities, children in small towns may grow up more healthily due to harmonious relationships among residents. People in small towns don’t have to wake up as early in the morning, as there are no traffic jams, and drivers tend to be more cautious, reducing the likelihood of accidents. While they may have fewer television channels, they have more friends readily available for socializing and entertainment.
As for my current situation, although I long for the cozy atmosphere and close relationships among neighbors and friends, which are often unique to small towns, I have chosen to live in one of the biggest cities in my country - Beijing. This is because I have found a good job here with a decent salary. I think I would prefer living in a small town when I retire one day.
Sample 6:
In English, there is a well-known fairy tale about a poor country boy, Dick Whittington, who goes to London believing that the streets of the city are “paved with gold.” The story is a classic “rags to riches” tale. Dick eventually becomes the Lord Mayor of London. Like the hero of that story, I always find wonder and adventure in cities.
Cities contain a fascinating assortment of people. Whenever I walk around a shopping precinct at midday on a weekend, I am captivated by the variety of individuals hurrying through the shops. Sometimes, I simply sit on a public bench and observe the diverse streams of shoppers passing by.
Today, in the age of globe-trotting transport and advanced communication, city life is more diverse than ever. Capital cities are now highly cosmopolitan and eager to attract foreign trade and currency. There is a contemporary English joke that says, “You can never find an Englishman in London.”
Whether rightly or wrongly, governments and local authorities tend to prioritize building public amenities in big cities. Money is invested in transportation, libraries, parks, and museums. Often, countries compete to construct the most impressive “showcase” buildings. For example, Malaysia has built a skyscraper taller than anything in New York. Similarly, within large countries, regions compete with each other: New York against Chicago, Shanghai against Hong Kong, or Beijing.
All of this benefits city dwellers. The magic of the Dick Whittington story is rekindled in me whenever I enter a library housed in a magnificent building. For university students studying art or music, large cities often offer galleries and public performances. Even as a teenager, I appreciated living in a city because it gave me the opportunity to attend rock concerts by my favorite bands several times a year.
Architecture shapes the urban landscape. For those who appreciate it, a city can be as visually exciting as the Himalayas. A modern metropolis resembles a mountain range with its height, light, and solidness. At the same time, old buildings add to its charm - quaint, unspoiled side streets, or shops and homes from distant ages. Even someone who spends their entire life in one large city could continue discovering its architectural secrets well into old age.
Humans are “social animals.” They talk, interact, and create. Cities provide libraries, universities, and café bars where people can meet and share ideas with others of their kind.
Sample 7:
Some people would like to live in a small town because the surroundings could be more picturesque, and people are friendlier compared to people in a big city. However, in my opinion, living in a big city is more effective and beneficial based on the following reasons.
First, living in a big city is convenient. Thanks to public transportation, any place in a big city is usually accessible. Without driving, you have many options among buses, trains and subway. Taxis are also available on almost every corner of the city. Besides, it is easy to find a restaurant or food stands in your neighborhood within walking distance whenever you are hungry. There are also convenience stores all over, so city residents can buy any stuff easily at any time without bothering to drive to a certain place to get what they need. Convenience is the best what a city can offer while a small town is less likely to.
In addition, a big city provides more education opportunities. The residents have easier access to schools and education resources, so do they to faculty and advanced facilities. Take teachers for example, they are willing to teach in a big city because of the better salary and there are more resources they need available in libraries and related institutes when they want to go further to sharpen their teaching skills. Similarly, when children plan to take some talented courses such as piano, art, and the like, a city with more options and business activities is where parents want their children to live and grow.
Here is another perfect example to illustrate my preference of a city. I used to be a volunteer in an elementary school in a small town. Although the town was lovely and clean, there was some inconvenience caused in daily life. First, less bus service was provided, so people usually had no choice but to wait a long time to take the bus. Second, restaurants and food stands were all closed after nine o’clock, so it’s hard to find something to eat if you are hungry late in the evening. Lastly, teachers in the elementary school might need to teach many courses with different subjects, when necessary, because of a lack of faculty, that is, an English teacher could be asked to teach math or science as well. Also, the facilities in the classroom and the science lab were old- fashioned. From my observation, people can live peacefully in a small town but actually there are more opportunities and availability a big city can offer.
Last but not least, infrastructure and public services are usually prominently featured in a big city. When I want to exercise on a rainy day, I can go to the sport center without worrying about places to go. In contrast, I might be trapped at home in a small town in the same situation. Besides, public services like medical care and care centers are fully developed for people with a pressing need. Libraries also provide better book circulation and activities to cater for their readers, which is not very likely to take place in a town with the number of people which is small. For people who like tranquility and secure, small towns are the best choice. However, for those who prefer economic prosperity, a variety of things to do, places to go and activities to join, the better choice is in a big city. I happen to be the one who prefers the latter and enjoys the lives in it.
Sample 8:
It is crucial to choose a place which suits you to live because where you live has influence over the quality of your life and happiness. Compared to those who prefer to live in a small town with a quiet environment, living in a big city to take advantage of the modern conveniences that it can offer is my choice.
First of all, the public transportation system is one of amenities people can benefit from. Big cities usually provide a well-developed transportation network, such as bus, train, subway and airport, so people in the city have very easy access to the vehicles that can help them reach any destination they want to. In contrast, the convenience of public transportation is usually not found in a small town, where people might tend to drive or use other means of transport to get about.
Besides, there are more opportunities for either finding a job or taking education. With a larger population, more jobs are available for everyone to find than those in the countryside. Take where I live for example, although the job market is very competitive, university graduates often move to Taipei, which is the major city in Taiwan. If you need to develop a skill, it is also likely that you will achieve it and then get a job successfully. More importantly, there are also more educational opportunities and a lot of different courses and institutions available. There is always availability of learning something new or developing practical skills in a big city.
Furthermore, cities can provide a variety of entertainment options every day. There is always something fun to do in a big city to keep people of all different interests from getting bored. Cities provide a lively nightlife, all types of shows, museums and sports facilities. Additionally, you will be able to connect with other people who share the same hobbies at different events.
While the lifestyle in a small town is less stressful, the city lifestyle has a lot of opportunities for people. Personally, I prefer to live in a big city which offers a variety of many options. In the meanwhile, I like the energy and the convenience in a big city. City life can have many positive impacts compared to rural life.
Sample 9:
There are many differences between living in a big city and a small town. Therefore, we must choose based on our personal preferences and needs. If you prefer a calm and peaceful environment, small towns are suitable for you. However, if you want to develop yourself, big cities are the best places to learn and acquire skills essential for your future.
In life, the most important thing for everyone is, of course, health. If someone’s health deteriorates, they might lose everything they have. Small towns often provide a healthier environment. You can enjoy peaceful rivers, mountains, abundant greenery, and a clear night sky filled with stars. Life there is calm and free from the excessive noise of big cities, as the population and number of cars are much smaller. However, living in a small town can mean missing out on global news, fashion trends, and other advancements.
On the other hand, living in a big city provides more opportunities for personal growth and the chance to enhance your competitive skills. Over time, this can help you establish your own identity and attitude in society. People in big cities are often motivated to work hard to support their families. However, city life comes with challenges, such as air pollution and waste management issues. If we do not address these problems, they could have serious consequences for our future.
In conclusion, small towns offer comfort and tranquility, while big cities are dynamic and full of opportunities. Personally, I would choose to live in a big city first to improve myself. Later, when I want to rest and prioritize my health, I would move to the countryside or a small town.
I hope you can choose the place that best suits your needs and appeals to you.
Sample 10:
I grew up in a small town and then moved to a big city. I didn't think I would like to live here, but I was wrong. I think life is much better in a big city. Transportation is much more convenient, everything is more exciting, and there is a greater variety of people. I can't imagine ever living in a small town again.
Transportation is easier in a city. In a small town, you have to have a car to get around because there isn't any kind of public transportation. In a city, on the other hand, there are usually buses and taxis, and some cities have subways. Cities often have heavy traffic, and expensive parking, but it doesn't matter because you can always take the bus. Using public transportation is usually cheaper and more convenient than driving a car, but you don't have this choice in a small town.
City life is more exciting than small town life. In small towns usually nothing changes. You see the same people every day, you go to the same two or three restaurants, everything is the same. In a city things change all the time. You see new people every day. There are many restaurants, with new ones to choose from all the time. New plays come to the theaters and new musicians come to the concert halls.
Cities have a diversity of people that you don't find in a small town. There are much fewer people in a small town and usually they are all alike. In a city you can find people from different countries, of different religions, of different races - you can find all kinds of people. This variety of people is what makes city life interesting.
Life in a city is convenient, exciting, and interesting. After experiencing city life, I could never live in a small town again.
Sample 11:
If you were asked to choose between living in a big city or a small town, where would you prefer to live? Some people might choose to live in a small town because the environment is cleaner, and it fosters closer relationships with others. This suggests that living in a small town has its benefits. However, I believe there are three key reasons why living in a big city is more advantageous.
First, living in a big city provides greater opportunities to gain advanced knowledge and develop oneself. In contrast, the range of educational options in a small town is often limited. Furthermore, the presence of many students in a city creates a competitive environment that encourages us to work harder. While education may not be the only important aspect of life, it remains essential because we rely on knowledge throughout our lifetime.
Second, living in a city allows us to meet more people and adapt to society more easily. For example, interacting with diverse individuals helps us learn about their personalities and characteristics. Building relationships and making friends in a city can greatly benefit us as we grow older. By communicating with people in a big city, we gain a better understanding of how society functions and what we need to do to thrive. Therefore, city life prepares us to navigate societal challenges more effectively.
Lastly, living in a big city offers more job opportunities. Securing employment is a crucial aspect of life, and cities typically provide a wider variety of workplaces, such as companies, factories, and universities. For instance, becoming a professor is more achievable in a city where universities are abundant. In contrast, small towns cannot guarantee the same level of employment opportunities.
In conclusion, while small towns have advantages like friendlier communities and a cleaner environment, I believe living in a big city is more beneficial. Cities offer better educational opportunities, greater chances to meet people and adapt to society, and more job prospects. For these reasons, I would prefer living in a big city over a small town.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Bộ câu hỏi: [TEST] Từ loại (Buổi 1) (Có đáp án)
Bài tập chức năng giao tiếp (Có đáp án)
Bộ câu hỏi: Các dạng thức của động từ (to v - v-ing) (Có đáp án)
500 bài Đọc điền ôn thi Tiếng anh lớp 12 có đáp án (Đề 1)
15000 bài tập tách từ đề thi thử môn Tiếng Anh có đáp án (Phần 1)
Bộ câu hỏi: Thì và sự phối thì (Phần 2) (Có đáp án)
Trắc nghiệm Tiếng anh 12 Tìm từ được gạch chân phát âm khác - Mức độ nhận biết có đáp án
500 bài Đọc hiểu ôn thi Tiếng anh lớp 12 có đáp án (Đề 21)