Some argue that fashion items cost too much money. Others say that is acceptable because fashion is an important part of life. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Write at least 250 words.
Fashion is an art of living. Although some people are of the opinion that living fashionably is very costly, others support it by arguing that the high cost is acceptable owing to the fact, that, fashion is an essential part of our lives. Although fashion brings with it high cost, I believe looking at the broader sense of it makes one realize the importance of fashion.
Some people believe that fashion has a high price to pay. For example-: the bags of Prada, a fashion house, although are excellent but too expensive. In scenarios like these, trying to live up to date could turn out to be nightmare for some. Secondly, most of the fashionable clothes or shoes are very expensive. Buying such clothes can lead to a hole in the pocket.Some people, often consider fashion with brands and as a result spend lot of money on them. This has even caused debt in many cases. For example-: In many countries buying an apple phone is termed with living in tech space and often gets associated with an individual’s identity. People often to show off buy such phones in loan.
However, others argue that living in fashion makes life more beautiful. Firstly, fashion allows us to look presentable. Often, while working or during interviews, looking presentable is very important.
Even more while meeting new people, if you look presentable chances are they will hear you with an extra ear. Secondly, fashion is an art. For example-: if a person decorates his/her house with candles, the house surely looks good and this is part of fashion. Even more, some countries like Paris has beautifully decorated roads and walls. It makes walking on them more peaceful and exciting. All of this, often ignored but is part of fashion.
To sum up, fashion is not buying branded clothes and shoes, it is an art which surely could even be practiced with less of money. Although fashion could be quite expensive but we need to get out of the illusion of taking expensive things as fashion and understand the real meaning of fashion.
In today’s competitive world, many families find it necessary for both the parents to go out to work. While some say the children in these families benefit from the additional income, others feel they lack support because of their parents’ absence. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Write 250 words.
The world has encountered great revolutions, inventions and wars in the past few centuries. This has led to the change in the way the world and its people function. Gone are the days when women had to do “purdah” or they were denied voting powers. This is the era when “women empowerment” is being demanded by men. We are living in times when there is more of equality and moreover the competitive levels have significantly increased. We all want to live a luxurious life and this has led to a trend of both parents working.
There are people of the opinion that it is important for both the parents to work in such competitive times, if they want to survive. Working parents do bring in great advantages along with. Firstly, they are able to provide better facilities and standard of living to their children. Secondly, if both parents work, it ensures that they both are making good use of the education that they have taken. Even more, working makes a person more independent.
On the other hand, few believe that if both parents work, it deprives the child of the care and the nurture he/she deserves. This happens when the child is in his/her growing years. Parents are the best teachers and their absence surely creates a void which no tuition teacher can fill. Even more, if children don’t see their parents often in their growing years, they tend to lose contact with them, causing troubles in later years.
Overall, a balanced life can always be the way out. Leaving job might make several talented individuals dependent on their better halves and keeping it might be unfair to their children. I believe that both the parents should do a job if they can give their undue attention to the child and his/her life before they go out to work.
Some people view teenage conflict with their parents as a necessary part of growing up, whilst others see it as something negative which should be avoided. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Write at least 250 words.
The most vulnerable years of a persons’ life are the teenage years, the years when a child gets rational, observes things around us with his/her own perspective and forms an image that lives with them for a long period of time. Apart from the external changes, a teenage even undergoes hormonal changes and they discover a new aspect of their body. All of these changes, internal and external, account for questions and confusions amongst them, often leading to conflicts.
Although some people are of the opinion that the conflicts must be avoided, I believe such frays are natural and must be handled with more wisdom than simple avoidance.
“Everyone sees the world with their own unique lenses”. As a result parents and children often have different points of view. For example-: A child on observing things around forms an opinion that God does not exist. Trying to suppress such thoughts and naming him/her as atheist, will only worsen the situation, as is often seen teenagers tend to feel lonely. Allowing such opinions to exist in their children, parents make them more independent and teach them that they need to stand by their own decisions and opinions and it is perfectly fine to be different. Suppressing them would make them more submissive in the later years of their lives.
Although, recently it has been observed that crimes committed by teenagers have increased in the past decade. The figures surely make parents concerned about their children. At this point suppressing conflicts is a better way to approach, but it must be made sure that you take your children into confidence first. Usually children are so scared of their parents that they don’t tell them the problems they are facing, often leading them to a whirlpool end.
To sum up, it can be said that, a teenage is like the growing bud, we need to make sure they get the right environment to grow in, so that they can think independently and yet learn the difference between right and wrong.
Do you think that private institutions should be banned ? Discuss your opinions in 250 words.
A country runs on education. The better education it provides to the younger generation, the higher economic success it will gain in later years. Keeping this in mind, a country usually has both private as well as government institutions. When establishing the institutions it is hoped that they would stand by their words, and will provide excellent education. Although with time, it has been observed that government run institutions lose their focus and indulge in activities that have no concern with education. I, although, still believe that private institutions should be banned.
Banning private institutions will surely come with great advantages. Firstly, the quality of education in government schools and colleges will find hope of improvement. It has been observed that until and unless people have no other choice they don’t raise their voice for reform. Secondly, the rise of private institutions has led to a satisfaction with mediocrity. In no ways, it means that private institutions instigate mediocrity, the point to be noted is that with the rise of private institutions people have become more of “show off”. For example-: Since the past decade the number of students doing Bachelors In Technology has increased many folds. The reason being the course is easily available in private institutions. As a result, people don’t introspect themselves more often and live a life under the pressure of society.
On the other hand, absence of private institutions might be a reason of upsurge amongst middle and high income people as the ban may be misunderstood as a loss in their freedom of choice. Even more children with special abilities are often cared more in private institutions and banning them would be a major setback to them.
In nutshell, I would like to assert the importance of improving the quality of government institutions. Private institutions do cater to every individual’s demands, but they often lead to either mediocrity or high level of competition. So, according to me, private institutions should be banned.