Scientists have found a way of protecting astronauts from solar radiation.
Anonymous Quiz
47%
TRUE
34%
FALSE
18%
NG
👍1
Andrew Howard thinks there is little that can be done to reduce accidents.
Anonymous Quiz
21%
T
33%
F
47%
NG
It is said that people should be encouraged to get married before they are 30, as this is best both for the individual and for society. Do you agree or disagree?
Some people feel that getting married prior to turning 30 is most beneficial for society and the newlyweds themselves. While this may be true to a certain extent, I think that age is just a number when it comes to building a happy family.
There are both personal and social benefits when people get married in their 20s. This is the age when people are curious and adventurous, so they are in a constant search of excitement and novelty. This, in effect, can be a cause of social ills like drug abuse, drinking, and prostitution, as we see in the instances of some western countries. However, if people have a family to look after, they will have to shoulder various household responsibilities and earn money to meet the needs; completely different positive priorities at this stage in their life. On a societal level, the chances are that couples will have healthier children if they get married before 30, for after this time, people’s physical strength weakens and physicians generally do not recommend having a baby after 35. Risking babies’ life or compromising its or a mother’s health are not sensible decisions when there is an alternative.
Whereas establishing a family early in life seems to be a worthwhile decision, it is may not always be the right one. In the first place, reaching maturity differs from one person to another. This implies that some of them may not be able to cope with relationship-wise issues, unable to make important decisions and therefore not be able to guarantee the security of their family. Not only immaturity, but also finances can be a serious issue in the lives of newlyweds due to their hasty decision to get married. This is because people during their 20s are usually taking their first steps in the world of work having graduated from universities, which means that they are less likely in a good financial condition. Being unable to deal with financial challenges of family, young couples tend to resort to divorce. The consequences may even be disastrous if they have children. In this sense, it is a change for the worse for both the individuals and society.
A marriage before the age of 30 does present a number of benefits; in my view, however, people’s maturity and financial condition should determine the age to build a family.
392 words
#task2
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
Some people feel that getting married prior to turning 30 is most beneficial for society and the newlyweds themselves. While this may be true to a certain extent, I think that age is just a number when it comes to building a happy family.
There are both personal and social benefits when people get married in their 20s. This is the age when people are curious and adventurous, so they are in a constant search of excitement and novelty. This, in effect, can be a cause of social ills like drug abuse, drinking, and prostitution, as we see in the instances of some western countries. However, if people have a family to look after, they will have to shoulder various household responsibilities and earn money to meet the needs; completely different positive priorities at this stage in their life. On a societal level, the chances are that couples will have healthier children if they get married before 30, for after this time, people’s physical strength weakens and physicians generally do not recommend having a baby after 35. Risking babies’ life or compromising its or a mother’s health are not sensible decisions when there is an alternative.
Whereas establishing a family early in life seems to be a worthwhile decision, it is may not always be the right one. In the first place, reaching maturity differs from one person to another. This implies that some of them may not be able to cope with relationship-wise issues, unable to make important decisions and therefore not be able to guarantee the security of their family. Not only immaturity, but also finances can be a serious issue in the lives of newlyweds due to their hasty decision to get married. This is because people during their 20s are usually taking their first steps in the world of work having graduated from universities, which means that they are less likely in a good financial condition. Being unable to deal with financial challenges of family, young couples tend to resort to divorce. The consequences may even be disastrous if they have children. In this sense, it is a change for the worse for both the individuals and society.
A marriage before the age of 30 does present a number of benefits; in my view, however, people’s maturity and financial condition should determine the age to build a family.
392 words
#task2
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
👍7
Some people believe that nowadays too much money is being spent on weddings and birthdays. Why do you think it is happening? What can be done to improve this situation?
Special occasions like birthdays and weddings are crucial events in people’s lives, so they, these days, are trying to celebrate them extravagantly. Although some reasons might explain why they do so, a number of measures can be suggested to tackle this social issue.
Focusing on the causes of spending too much money on weddings and birthdays, perhaps the most obvious one is people’s desire to show off. Not only is this true for the wealthy who have important connections among whom hosts want to stand out, but also it is being a common case among the general public who seek respect and recognition. Another reason for this attitude is the intention to mark a crucial date in one’s life. Weddings, for instance, are usually celebrated once in a lifetime, so couples want to make sure that this event is remembered by their relatives, friends and close-knits; thus, organizing parties and ceremonies in a luxurious fashion spending large sums of money.
Turning to possible solutions to this “sumptuous” way of celebrating events, the most effective one seems to be passing laws to deter people from doing so. Organizing birthday parties may not be as costly as organizing weddings, but still if people’s financial conditions are not sound, there is a risk of them getting into debt. If the government introduces laws to limit the number of attendees to these parties, hosts can economize significantly on spending. Besides enforcing laws, the government also can educate the public to be more prudent. This is most effectively done at schools. As a result, education of this kind will nurture more conscious, thrifty, and sensible adults, in the long run.
The causes of spending excessive amounts of money on opulent celebrations like weddings and birthdays are twofold. However, this trend can be addressed by the government initiatives of introducing laws and public education.
308 words 38 min
#task2
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
Special occasions like birthdays and weddings are crucial events in people’s lives, so they, these days, are trying to celebrate them extravagantly. Although some reasons might explain why they do so, a number of measures can be suggested to tackle this social issue.
Focusing on the causes of spending too much money on weddings and birthdays, perhaps the most obvious one is people’s desire to show off. Not only is this true for the wealthy who have important connections among whom hosts want to stand out, but also it is being a common case among the general public who seek respect and recognition. Another reason for this attitude is the intention to mark a crucial date in one’s life. Weddings, for instance, are usually celebrated once in a lifetime, so couples want to make sure that this event is remembered by their relatives, friends and close-knits; thus, organizing parties and ceremonies in a luxurious fashion spending large sums of money.
Turning to possible solutions to this “sumptuous” way of celebrating events, the most effective one seems to be passing laws to deter people from doing so. Organizing birthday parties may not be as costly as organizing weddings, but still if people’s financial conditions are not sound, there is a risk of them getting into debt. If the government introduces laws to limit the number of attendees to these parties, hosts can economize significantly on spending. Besides enforcing laws, the government also can educate the public to be more prudent. This is most effectively done at schools. As a result, education of this kind will nurture more conscious, thrifty, and sensible adults, in the long run.
The causes of spending excessive amounts of money on opulent celebrations like weddings and birthdays are twofold. However, this trend can be addressed by the government initiatives of introducing laws and public education.
308 words 38 min
#task2
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
👍4
People's shopping habits depend more on the age group they belong to than any other factors.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is argued that age is the most determining factor when it comes to buying habits of consumers. I believe that one’s income level, gender and place of residence play a greater role in their shopping habits.
I believe how much a person earns is arguably the main driver behind their shopping habits. In fact, most studies into consumer behavior found that shopping frequency and volume start to grow once people pass a certain level of income threshold, and shopping becomes a fairly affordable activity allowed by higher earnings. This argument can further be illustrated by growing consumerism in the richer countries of the world.
The second most driving variable in the equation of shopping habits, in my view, is gender. There is a deep-seated idea that women shop more often and for longer periods of time than men do. The explanation, so far, lies in the fact that most female shoppers view shopping as a social activity whereas to men it is more of a necessity.
Another factor at work seems to be where one resides, urban or rural area. People in cities tend to shop more frequently since access to shopping facilities is greater there than in villages where people might have to shop every two weeks. Also, rural dwellers are sometimes required to commute large distances to accomplish this chore.
In conclusion, although some people assert that purchasing habits are mostly driven by age, I reiterate that personal income, gender and one’s locality should be perceived to be the primary contributors to these habits.
#task2
#under40mins
#Mukhammadali_Issues
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is argued that age is the most determining factor when it comes to buying habits of consumers. I believe that one’s income level, gender and place of residence play a greater role in their shopping habits.
I believe how much a person earns is arguably the main driver behind their shopping habits. In fact, most studies into consumer behavior found that shopping frequency and volume start to grow once people pass a certain level of income threshold, and shopping becomes a fairly affordable activity allowed by higher earnings. This argument can further be illustrated by growing consumerism in the richer countries of the world.
The second most driving variable in the equation of shopping habits, in my view, is gender. There is a deep-seated idea that women shop more often and for longer periods of time than men do. The explanation, so far, lies in the fact that most female shoppers view shopping as a social activity whereas to men it is more of a necessity.
Another factor at work seems to be where one resides, urban or rural area. People in cities tend to shop more frequently since access to shopping facilities is greater there than in villages where people might have to shop every two weeks. Also, rural dwellers are sometimes required to commute large distances to accomplish this chore.
In conclusion, although some people assert that purchasing habits are mostly driven by age, I reiterate that personal income, gender and one’s locality should be perceived to be the primary contributors to these habits.
#task2
#under40mins
#Mukhammadali_Issues
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
❤2👍2
The death penalty is a contentious issue in many states and countries around the world. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
Whether capital punishment should be practiced or not is controversial in most countries. Although it has some benefits, I believe that the drawbacks it brings about are far more significant.
To begin with the positives of the sentencing to death, a crucial one is that it minimizes crime rates in a country. This is because it strikes fear into the hearts of criminals, and make them think twice before offending. This type of punishment is also likely to be an effective way of dealing with recidivists – re-offenders. Having been sentenced a number of times after committing serious crimes, such as rape, treason and murder, prison sentences may seem normal and too light for them. If a law were passed to legalize capital punishment, we would perhaps see a significant decline in the rate of these crimes as it would teach a valuable lesson to others.
Despite the arguments presented above, I feel that it is not a sensible decision to make for a number of reasons. Firstly, it is morally unacceptable to take a life. People might have committed a crime accidentally or while protecting themselves, so punishment by execution is just another murder, an unjustified one sometimes. Besides being morally wrong, the death verdict causes further problems like psychological traumas to family members of criminals, which will be followed by years of depression and stress. Giving people another opportunity to correct themselves or giving them lengthy prison sentences could be effective alternatives to harsh punishments of electrocution, hanging, and lethal injections. Above all, who are we to judge?
The death penalty has both pros and cons. However, while it might seem justifiable as an effective deterrent of crime, in my view, it is unacceptable on ethical grounds. Overall, the advantages are outweighed by the negatives.
#task2
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
Whether capital punishment should be practiced or not is controversial in most countries. Although it has some benefits, I believe that the drawbacks it brings about are far more significant.
To begin with the positives of the sentencing to death, a crucial one is that it minimizes crime rates in a country. This is because it strikes fear into the hearts of criminals, and make them think twice before offending. This type of punishment is also likely to be an effective way of dealing with recidivists – re-offenders. Having been sentenced a number of times after committing serious crimes, such as rape, treason and murder, prison sentences may seem normal and too light for them. If a law were passed to legalize capital punishment, we would perhaps see a significant decline in the rate of these crimes as it would teach a valuable lesson to others.
Despite the arguments presented above, I feel that it is not a sensible decision to make for a number of reasons. Firstly, it is morally unacceptable to take a life. People might have committed a crime accidentally or while protecting themselves, so punishment by execution is just another murder, an unjustified one sometimes. Besides being morally wrong, the death verdict causes further problems like psychological traumas to family members of criminals, which will be followed by years of depression and stress. Giving people another opportunity to correct themselves or giving them lengthy prison sentences could be effective alternatives to harsh punishments of electrocution, hanging, and lethal injections. Above all, who are we to judge?
The death penalty has both pros and cons. However, while it might seem justifiable as an effective deterrent of crime, in my view, it is unacceptable on ethical grounds. Overall, the advantages are outweighed by the negatives.
#task2
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
👍7
👍1🌚1
Alisher&Mukhammadali posts
The death penalty is a contentious issue in many states and countries around the world. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? Whether capital punishment should be practiced or not is controversial in most countries. Although it has some benefits,…
Intro: 'Whether x or not' sounds slightly awkward to me as a starter - good
Body 1: What is 'of the sentencing to death'... sounds awkward - 'it make'? - nice, but 'to others' at the end isn't really on the same point as what you were making... you were speaking in the context of existing criminals, not potential ones
Body 2: what is 'it' referring to in the topic sentence... also, I wouldn't characterise capital punishment as a 'decision' - 'and an...' - why is it morally unacceptable to take a life?? A lot of people would argue with that... is there something we can add to support this claim other than "trust me". - 'the death penalty' (not verdict) - 'punishments such as' - The last sentence is a bit isolated... it's kind of a third point... I think it could be worked into the 'morally unacceptable' point somehow
Conclusion: good
Overall: This was high level stuff, but it had slight imperfections in a few places. I feel like this would get straight 8s.
Feedback was provided by Beyden James (IELTS 9.0 with 8.5 in W).
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
Body 1: What is 'of the sentencing to death'... sounds awkward - 'it make'? - nice, but 'to others' at the end isn't really on the same point as what you were making... you were speaking in the context of existing criminals, not potential ones
Body 2: what is 'it' referring to in the topic sentence... also, I wouldn't characterise capital punishment as a 'decision' - 'and an...' - why is it morally unacceptable to take a life?? A lot of people would argue with that... is there something we can add to support this claim other than "trust me". - 'the death penalty' (not verdict) - 'punishments such as' - The last sentence is a bit isolated... it's kind of a third point... I think it could be worked into the 'morally unacceptable' point somehow
Conclusion: good
Overall: This was high level stuff, but it had slight imperfections in a few places. I feel like this would get straight 8s.
Feedback was provided by Beyden James (IELTS 9.0 with 8.5 in W).
⚡️@alisherposts ⚡️
Alisher&Mukhammadali posts
The death penalty is a contentious issue in many states and countries around the world. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? Whether capital punishment should be practiced or not is controversial in most countries. Although it has some benefits,…
A model by Beyden James.
The death penalty is a contentious issue in many states and countries around the world. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
There is a lot of controversy surrounding the practice of capital punishment across the world. Although the death penalty does have some benefits, I am of the opinion that it is not appropriate for any government to have the power to kill in this way.
There are several advantages associated with the application of the death penalty for extreme crimes. First of all, the death penalty could be considered to be the ultimate form of justice. For example, in the case of families who have had a loved one murdered, they might feel that true justice can only be found in taking the life of the murderer. Secondly, killing a convicted criminal is the most effective way of keeping people safe from those who have committed heinous actions. There are probably thousands of cases wherein murderers have completed their prison sentences or received parole and have killed again.
However, the drawbacks of capital punishment outweigh its advantages. This is because capital punishment is a tool of the government which is not always used on guilty people. In the United States alone, over 300 executed apparent criminals were later proven innocent. It should also be acknowledged that capital punishment has been used on political prisoners and for actions that are no longer considered crimes, such as holding particular religious beliefs. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that countries who have stopped the practice of killing criminals do not suffer increases in crime as a result. This is evidenced by countries such as Denmark who are currently closing prisons due to a lack of felons.
In conclusion, while the death penalty in some cases can provide justice and protection, it is clear that it is often misused and is not required to prevent serious crimes. Therefore, I believe that it should not be a part of the justice system.
⚡️@alisherposts⚡️
The death penalty is a contentious issue in many states and countries around the world. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
There is a lot of controversy surrounding the practice of capital punishment across the world. Although the death penalty does have some benefits, I am of the opinion that it is not appropriate for any government to have the power to kill in this way.
There are several advantages associated with the application of the death penalty for extreme crimes. First of all, the death penalty could be considered to be the ultimate form of justice. For example, in the case of families who have had a loved one murdered, they might feel that true justice can only be found in taking the life of the murderer. Secondly, killing a convicted criminal is the most effective way of keeping people safe from those who have committed heinous actions. There are probably thousands of cases wherein murderers have completed their prison sentences or received parole and have killed again.
However, the drawbacks of capital punishment outweigh its advantages. This is because capital punishment is a tool of the government which is not always used on guilty people. In the United States alone, over 300 executed apparent criminals were later proven innocent. It should also be acknowledged that capital punishment has been used on political prisoners and for actions that are no longer considered crimes, such as holding particular religious beliefs. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that countries who have stopped the practice of killing criminals do not suffer increases in crime as a result. This is evidenced by countries such as Denmark who are currently closing prisons due to a lack of felons.
In conclusion, while the death penalty in some cases can provide justice and protection, it is clear that it is often misused and is not required to prevent serious crimes. Therefore, I believe that it should not be a part of the justice system.
⚡️@alisherposts⚡️
👍4
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Why am I seeing this video now?
It is like the YouTube algorithm waited for me to graduate before showing me this lifehack🤦♂️. (btw, I just tried it and it worked!)
It is like the YouTube algorithm waited for me to graduate before showing me this lifehack🤦♂️. (btw, I just tried it and it worked!)