Many young people's choice of future jobs is based on salary. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? ⬇️

In recent times, materialism has become an integral part of people’s lives, causing many to equate material wealth with success. This shift has significantly influenced the way individuals choose their careers, with financial gain now often outweighing other important factors. I feel that a greater monetary reward for work is, in fact, the most crucial consideration, especially in the 21st century, despite its drawbacks.

One key advantage of working in a high-paying job is financial independence, which allows individuals to easily cover their bills, pay rent, and maintain a savings account for emergencies. Without financial concerns, they can devote more time and energy to their work, thereby improving focus and productivity, which benefits both employees and companies’ well-being. This also enhances employee retention rates as financial security reduces the likelihood of talent poaching by competing companies. Furthermore, a salary-oriented mindset helps workers to keep motivated and incentivized. Studies show that individuals with higher earnings tend to work harder, stay ahead of schedule, and remain in the office longer than their lower-paid counterparts, highlighting the importance of choosing jobs that offer greater monetary compensation. If the financial needs are not met, it is likely to result in dissatisfaction among the workforce and foster resentment towards higher-ups. Therefore, financial compensation should be considered a top priority when choosing a career.

This preference, however, may bring about its own set of problems. While money can act as a motivating factor and satisfaction tool for many individuals, it can also take its toll on their mental health, leading to depression, stress, and poor work-life balance. Because lucrative jobs often require long hours, high pressure, and complete dedication to the field, which may not be suitable for everyone. Some individuals may want to have a simple lifestyle with an average income, while working in positions that align with their personal interests and agendas.

Having considered this trend from both ends of the spectrum, I believe that a greater financial reward is certainly the most vital employment aspect to consider, as it can provide financial security, a source of motivation and job satisfaction. This choice, in turn, can have repercussions on employees’ mental well-being, which makes it a less appropriate option for those prioritizing balance.

368 words

Speaking Part 3 Tip ✅


Do you think people communicate differently in person compared to online? How so?

I guess there is a mountain of difference between how people communicate when meeting with each other physically and also online. When we do meet in person, we tend to show more emotion, to be more precise, because we hand gesture, we make eye contact, and sometimes we even touch each other. But when it comes to online communication method, I would like to think that it is a bit different because online we cannot know for sure the exact tone of the speech, especially if it's written in context. We have no idea what the other person is trying to say, for example, in text messages, so I would say these two ways of communication are vastly different. (band 8.0/8.5 / my answer)


I think there’s a huge difference between communicating face-to-face and online. In person, we show a lot more emotion, things like hand gestures, eye contact, and even physical touch. You can get a much clearer sense of what someone’s feeling. But online, it’s harder to read the tone, especially when it’s just text. You might misinterpret what someone means, because without facial expressions or body language, it’s harder to tell if they’re being serious or joking. So, I’d say the two ways of communicating are pretty different. (band 9.0 / native speaker answer)


➡️ Now, my conclusion is, I am supposed to be more casual instead of trying to sound like a professor from Harvard. See how a native speaker can use casual expressions like 'read the tone, get a much clearer sense of, there is a huge difference, and harder to tell'. There is a thin line between 8.0, 8.5 and 9.0 in speaking, but I won't stop until I crack it, while wishing patience to my AI friend. I could have done better if I was not feeling worn, I mean, for Pete's sake, it is 3:22 in the morning, so I better get a well-deserved shut-eye.

Some believe that individuals who commit serious crimes should be given the death penalty. Others argue that rehabilitation is a better solution. Do you agree or disagree with the death penalty?

There is a view that criminals responsible for heinous crimes should be given the capital punishment; however, others argue that this is not the right course of action and instead advocate for their rehabilitation. I, for one, believe that the death penalty is a necessary measure that ensures the safety of the innocent, despite the few benefits rehabilitation programs may offer.

The proponents of rehabilitating offenders cite various reasons to support their stance. One clear reason why this may prove to be as effective as capital punishment is the delivery of unbiased justice. Sometimes, when delivering a verdict, the system fails to account for the subtle elements of a criminal act, such as motive or circumstances, leading to public distrust in law and order. For example, criminals with inborn psychopathic traits should be treated differently from others – say, through rehabilitation – as it is not entirely their fault that they are born this way; the underlying cause often lies in their genetic makeup or upbringing, which is beyond their control. By the same token, those who commit serious crimes out of necessity should also face a different approach to punishment, allowing them a second chance in life to set things right. That said, an overly lenient sentencing policy may lead to social unrest, let alone provoke resentment among the victims’ families.

Notwithstanding these arguments, I remain convinced that the death penalty is essential to guarantee the safety and peace of innocent citizens. There is no doubt that the death row is packed with criminals with terrifying backgrounds, for instance, mass-murderers, child rapists, serial killers, and cannibals. Unless they are given capital punishment, they are most likely to be released after a number of years and re-offend, taking more innocent lives thanks to cracks in the justice system. Besides, this makes economic sense, especially considering the fact that prisons are funded through taxpayer money, it would be more reasonable to redirect government resources to poorer aspects of society rather than wasting tax money on such criminals.

Furthermore, rehabilitating individuals who have committed serious crimes could inadvertently fuel vigilantism. When the justice system is perceived as being too lenient, particularly towards those guilty of heinous offences, it can spark public outrage and undermine trust in legal institutions. In such cases, some individuals or communities may feel compelled to take matters into their own hands, believing that justice has not been properly served. This rise in vigilantism not only weakens the rule of law but also poses a serious threat to social stability, as it confuses the line between proper justice and mindless revenge.

In conclusion, while the rehabilitation of criminals may appear to be a more humane approach, particularly in cases involving psychological disorders or desperate circumstances, it is not without its drawbacks. The possibility of repeat offences, the economic burden on society, and the threat of vigilante action are serious concerns that cannot be overlooked. Thus, in my view, capital punishment remains a necessary and justified measure to uphold justice, protect the innocent, and preserve public trust in the legal system.

510 words

#LawAndOrder 🩸

Financial education should be included as a mandatory subject in schools to prepare students for managing money effectively. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It has been argued that schools should incorporate financial education as a compulsory part of curriculum to help students deal with financial matters more effectively. While the inclusion of finance as a subject may not be entirely beneficial, as it could overshadow other essential subjects, I believe that this is a positive step to take since it can prepare students for real-world financial decisions and promote saving and investment habits.

Some people argue that individuals can learn to manage their budget more consciously if financial literacy is taught from a young age at school. While this is a valid point, it is also important to factor in the potential repercussions including financial education as a standalone subject, particularly the impact it may have on other crucial subjects, such as mathematics or physics. As far as students' futures are concerned, diverting attention from these subjects would not be the right course of action, as they are often cited as stepping stones to a successful career. If young minds devote more time and energy to these core subjects, they are more likely to be prepared for entrance exams for higher education, even in the absence of formal financial education.

However, I remain convinced that financial literacy classes are necessary for students to function effectively as adults later down the line. In today’s increasingly complex financial landscape, it is vital for individuals to make informed financial decisions in life so that they can achieve financial independence and be able to provide for their families in the future. With strong monetary literacy skills, young people are more likely to circumvent common pitfalls such as debt accumulation, impulsive spending, or falling victim to financial scams. For instance, understanding how credit works or how to budget monthly expenses can empower students to live within their means and plan for long-term goals like higher education, homeownership, or retirement.

Beyond personal benefits, fostering such habits also contributes to the broader economy by creating a generation of financially responsible citizens who are more likely to invest, save, and avoid reliance on public support systems. In this sense, early exposure to financial education can be seen not only as a personal asset but also a public good that supports both individual well-being and societal stability.

In conclusion, despite concerns about diverting focus from core subjects, financial education equips students with essential life skills. In my view, by fostering smart financial habits early on, schools can better prepare younger generation for challenges in the real world and ensure long-term stability.

419 words

#FinancialEducation 💸

this is how it feels to finish an essay on the topic of money 💯