It is important to protect the environment, but they make no efforts on it. When you walk on the street, you can clearly see that there are a lot of protect environment poster around you. But the feeling of apathy nearly wrote on every citizen’s face even they know how important protect environment is. The reason of this can divided into individual reason and government reason. From the individual perspective, environmental problems may be too big or too complicated for them to solve even if they are keen on dedicating the environment, they can’t possibly solve it. That is true, in the long run, this is the result of citizens understand the severity of protect environment. For example, the plastic bags, if someone throws it in the wild area, they will never by biodegraded until at least 500 years. Also, it carries out a wrong concept, that is using disposable product is trivial to the whole world. So, this could be done by a process of education which points out the way how a small family become an environmentally friendly lifestyle for family members as well as less stress on the governments, perhaps very limited resources. But it doesn’t mean that government should pay no attention to this situation. In general, it is thought that it is the obligation of government to face this situation, rather than depending on underage’s volunteer work or even publicity on festival concerned once or twice per year. Therefore, some laws and regulations may be constituted to solve the problem, such as using the odd-and-even-numbered cars in cities, which was used in Beijing Olympic. In a conclusion, environment problem affects every aspect of our life. So, we should work together to make it better.

High sales of consumer goods reflect the power of advertising but not the real need of society Nowadays, there are a lot of advertisements in television and also on the streets. Some people think that the advertising boosts the sale of goods and encourages people to buy things unnecessarily. This argument may be true. In my country, many advertising companies produce advertisements with famous and popular actors or singers. People, especially young adults, buy goods that their favorite singer advertises, although they do not really need the products. The products in the television, always looks gorgeous and good qualities. As a result of this, people often buy things without enough thinking. Consumers may not actually need it but they buy goods impulsively soon after they watch the advertising. Furthermore, as many customers buy a particular product due to its advertising campaign, the other people may be affected by the trend, even if the product is not of the real needs of the society. On the other hand, there are various aspects against these arguments. It is people’s choice to choose what to buy and what not to buy. Advertising may be not a cause of customers’ buying habits. Individuals have their own spending habits. If they have got enough disposable income, then the right to make a decision is given to them. No one actually can judge whether the goods sold are the real needs of the society or not. In conclusion, as customers have their own strong opinions and standard of good quality goods; it is better to leave them to make their own decisions in buying things.

Responsible tourists have paid attention to preserving both culture and environment of the places Being a responsible travelers, to a great extent, means to be environmentally friendly to scenic destinations and protective to local cultures and traditions. However, this essay believes that travelers can achieve the former, but are culturally harmful. The environment for travelers to protect their place is no different from their homeland and homeland. Admittedly, destination countries are at different levels in terms of environmental protection because of the stage of development they are in. However, that should not be the reason why tourists do not hold the highest standards for them to protect local environment, be it better or worse than where they come from. In that case, it is totally within the tourists’ ability to preserve the local environment, and the key is to enhance environmental awareness by themselves or local authorities. The cultural side of the problem might not be as optimistic. For the tourists, they inevitably bring in exotic cultural aspects to the destination areas/countries. Tourists speak foreign tongues despite the phrase book they carry; they are most likely dressed in a way they feel comfortable or in accordance with their own traditions; their life-long behaviors and mindsets are not possibly changed for and during the weeks on the way. Moreover, the attractions and local governments are catering their travelling facilities and operations to the convenience of travelers. A good example would be that European shops are increasingly hiring Chinese-speaking sales assistants for the sake of Chinese tourists. In a conclusion, it is possible for tourist to watch out for the preservation of local environment on their trips, but every now and then, influences from tourists and hospitable efforts by the local government, however insignificant they may seem, are eating into local culture.

public museum and art galleries will not be needed because people can see art by using a computer. Due to the help of the development of computers, there are more and more online museums and art galleries. There new technologies attract lots of people’s eyes and many people decided to visit the online museums instead of a real one. Do, some people think that museums and art galleries are no longer needed. In my point of view, public museums and art galleries are still played an important role in community. First of all, art galleries and museums are sometimes city’s signal. It is a sign of the history of a city. In many city museums, there are a lot of old real things there which records the changes happened in this city. They are the eyewitness of the past. What’s more different art galleries can also shows not only the citizens but also the visitors how many great artist came out from that city. They are the proud of that city. Secondly, art galleries and museums can also help people who are studying art and archaeology. Since most of the things that in an art gallery and a museum are real things, students can have a more clear though about how the color is and also why it looks like this. But it is in an on-line museum or art gallery, no matters how big the picture you can put up, the color and the model cannot be the same as it is in an art gallery or a museum. In a conclusion, reduce art galleries and museums are never a good idea, and it is ridiculous to use a computer instead of it.

Countries should produce food for all population eats and import food as little as possible. Many countries are now importing a variety of food products from other countries. This trend happens due to the significant demands from local markets, from them, most of the costumers are more willing to buy new things especially things from abroad. So, some people may argue that countries should be able to produce food for their own people instead of importing them. Firstly, weather plays a very big roll in agriculture. Not many countries have the best weather to grow certain fruits. For example, sweet mangoes can only be grown in tropical countries, but if it grows in cold countries, it will be less tasty. So, most western countries would like to import mangos from tropical countries. If it must be reduce, the price of the products must be higher that before and the average income earners will not be able to afford it. Secondly, if a country decided to grow their own food for their people in order to reduce import food, it can give a huge pressure to the agriculture products. Actually, many countries all had little place to grow things; they cannot afford enough food for the people of their countries. As a result of this, import food from other countries can reduce this kind of burden. In a nutshell, countries should be able to produce their own food for their own people and also should encourage the right products to be import so that it can do more help to people’s life and also let them get more profits from the import.

Government shouldn’t spend money in theater and stadiums;should spend on medical and education. There has began a big argument over whether public funds should be invested in theater and stadium construction or in medical care and education. Although general population need public entertainment and enjoyment, these could not happen until the demand for higher quality of education and medical care is met. It is certain that investments in arts and sports can provide a large number of job opportunities. For example, the reason why many cities are competing for the right to hold the next Olympic Games is that it will attract more investments in fundamental facilities and bring about more job opportunities. As soon as stadiums and sports centers are established in neighboring areas of a city, an increasing number of related industries will be developed in an accelerating pace, such as hotels, restaurants and even casinos. This is an ecosystem of a whole industry. However, the splendid vision could not happen unless a country has reached a higher level of education and medical care. When the young has the equal right to acquire knowledge in public schools and the old has the free right to receive treatments in public hospitals, the investments in other entertainments can be of high value. In contrast, if the basic demands for elementary education and medical care cannot be met, stadiums and theaters will be a dream difficult to be realized. Based on all the arguments mentioned above, it is conceded that although stadiums and theaters are of high importance to the general public, investments in education and medical care is put on the top of the government list.

The quality of life in big cities worse. What are the causes? What should be taken to deal with? Nowadays people who live in the big cities have a declined trend in life qualities. There are a lot of reasons that caused this serious problem and also several solutions have to be taken to alleviate this issue. It can be clearly seen that the explosion of the raising population lead to the decline of the life qualities. With more and more people who are from countryside or other countries immigrate into big cities like wasp, the rising number of people means the more public facilities we need such as cars, houses and schools. This can course terrible traffic problems and housing crisis. What’s more, the excessive consumption of people stimulate the price in big cities rise up and make the human’s life expenses increase quickly. Furthermore, the fast speed of the living style in giant cites aggravate the waste quality. Under the competitive environment people will have to put more effort and time on study and work. So the time, for people to relax and entertain is becoming shorter and shorter. As a result of this most of them will face over pressure or even health problem. All of these facts are not good for enhancing living quality. Obviously, there are some of the methods that can be taken in order to enhance the living quality in cities. Government can put some of the companies into the countryside, so there will be less people come into cities to find jobs. Also, employees should learn how to balance the time; they should learn to enjoy their lives. In a conclusion, poor living standards is the inevitable result for the large population and the fast living style, but we still have some ways to overcome this problem.

The government should pay for road system? Car owners should pay for it? With the increasing number of private cars, roads are always congested and hence the road systems are in need for expansion. Some people believe that it is the government’s responsibility, as the costs will come out of the taxpayers’ money. On the contrary, because of the convenience of read users, others think that the onus is on them. In my view, both should be liable to this development. Developing good road systems is on the hands of the government. Citizens contribute the society through taxes and it is government’s responsibility to use the collected income on infrastructures. Part from building hospitals, housing and schools, governments should ensure roads within their countries are sufficient and efficient. Also, in many countries, car owners are already paying a registration fee yearly. Therefore, governments should be fully responsible for the roads’ expansion. However, others think that road users should be held accountable to the reforming. No matter how the number of car owners increasing, there are still some citizens who do not own car in their garages. For them, it is not fair to do the contribution on roads; instead it can be used on medical and education prospect that can benefit all. As drivers are the sole beneficiaries of an expanded road system, they, therefore should pay for the costs. In my opinion, the cost to develop a well-rounded road system is extremely large. If the funding is solely responsible by car owners, the fee each driver has to pay might be too costly and unaffordable to some. In that case, governments should shoulder the burden, as it is never the less a government’s responsibility to provide better infrastructure to the public. In conclusion, citizens are paying the government taxes and the regime is accountable for infrastructures in their cities while car owners are also responsible for the expanded systems as they are the beneficiaries of such are vamp. Personally, I think the costs should be shared in order not to impose a heavy burden on both sides.

people who do not know their neighbors, what causes this situation? How to solve? There is a worrying trend that a neighbor is now more like a stranger next door and residents have no interests in communicating with others nearby. That is not a good social environment and there are several reasons about this. The most important reason stems from the change in communication between people. In fact, in an age of internet, people, especially young adults are more prefer to use social network for connection, such as Facebook, Wechat, QQ and Twitter, than face to face conversation. Therefore, as long as the social networks attract people, people will unconsciously strange from people living past. Another reason is that under the stress of job competition, there has been a common work oriented life style among people, which means full devotion into jobs, longer the working hours and has more extra meetings at night or weekend. So, people could not afford to spend time on chatting with neighbors the same way as the old days. In my opinion, there are two main ways for the solution to this problem. Firstly, hold more group activities like weekly parties and sports competitions can help rebuilding the connection between you and your neighbors. Through these interactions, people living in neighborhood would embrace more opportunities to know more about each other. In addition, the laws with the function of limiting work time of social employees should be enacted and carried out strictly. If this act can be established, it can do a great help in giving employees more time to enjoy their lives.