In many countries, more and more people can buy a wide range of household goods like television, microwave oven and rice cooker. Is it a positive or negative development? Discuss both views and give your opinion.
In a world of consumerism, home electrical and electronic appliances have become so integral to modern life that, in many ways, they are what distinguish today’s society from yesterday’s. Household goods like television, microwave oven and rice cooker make your life so much easierand more enjoyable, but there are some disadvantages. As a whole, this kind of household goods, when properly used, can bring you more benefits than drawbacks.
Generally speaking, buying over a dozen household equipments intended for daily use may be beneficial to you at home, from cooking to entertainment. Your microwave oven, for instance, allows you to cook rapidly with the turn of a dial, and this convenience provides more options in your daily life than in the past. Likewise, your rice cooker can simplify the cooking process by reducing the number of steps between you and your meal at the table. Further, because your refrigerator preserves foods for days or even weeks past their natural expiration dates, you can keep enough foods stocked in your freezer for future cooking, thereby saving your time spent on shopping. Similar advantages also apply to washing machines, dish-washers, dryers, and vacuum cleaners and so on. Thus, the more free time you save due to having appliances, the more other things you are capable of doing at your will, including watching television in the comfort of home after a heavy day from work.
However, the development of consumerism in many countries is not entirely positive; and there are drawbacks which are less obvious and yet they should not be overlooked. To begin with, it not only costs money to buy consumer equipments but also to operate them. Of course, cost is a disadvantage if you buy too many household gadgets and use them excessively in what is called the “throw-away” society. No doubt, the modern consumerism is likely to have an en environmental impact, either from the production processes or the disposal of the devices ranging from kitchen devices to television sets. Accordingly, without safe and efficient ways of recycling, electronic wastes (after being burned to salvage bits of metal) may release toxic substance into the atmosphere, polluting the immediate environment. That is to say, the dramatic increase in the number of household goods means the problem of greater carbon dioxide emissions, apart from the problem of rising energy demands and expenses that will need to be met.
On balance, the development of having useful appliances at your home is more positive than negative. Despite some bad effects typical of modern consumerism, life has become so much more full of pleasure due to these devices available from the kitchen to the bedroom. Now, ask yourself if you would rather live in today’s society or yesterday’s.
It is right that college graduates earn higher salaries than the less well-educated in the community. But they should also pay the full cost of their study. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Some conclude that college students should bear total expenses for their higher learning on the generalization that college graduates usually receive higher salaries for similar jobs than those without a college degree. We cannot deny that higher level of education, indeed, does associate with better income. Still, built on such fact alone, the conclusion remains questionable.
The whole argument in question rests on an assumption that it is always the case that people with higher education make more money than those less well-educated. But salary or income is, in most cases, based on contributions made by employees to companies or organizations in which they work for. Statistics in the labor market indicate that people with professional training tend to find jobs easier than college graduates do and that blue-collar workers who do not hold college degrees are becoming the hotties in the labor market. Employers prefer to hire and pay more to highly skilled and specially trained people rather than fresh college graduates. In the auto industry, for instance, skilled technicians make two or three times more than their college educated counterparts who make the average salaries in other companies. And it is widely accepted that people’s income is determined more by talent, hard work, and willingness to take risks than solely by certain qualifications such as college education. Otherwise, the unemployment rate of college graduates would not be increasing every year and the rule of supply and demand will lose much of power in controlling the labor market. Admittedly in some knowledge extensive field such as research, teaching, and practice of law the labor force are primarily consists of highly educated professionals. But such people make up only a fraction of the labor market and are thus unrepresentative of the whole employment in general.
Considering the goal of education, we find that it is even more problematic for the country to throw all the responsibility of financing college education to college students. The goal of higher education of a nation is to improve and strengthen the general level of intellectual and professional capacity of its labor force, thereby increasing the competency of the nation in the global economy. As tax payers, parents all contributes to the education system and country in various ways. It is only reasonable and necessary that the country gives some forms of financially assistance to students to ease the burden of rising education costs. Such help should go not only to students from needy or impoverished families but also to outstanding students from affluent backgrounds. Doing so can significantly boost the motivation of children from millions of families to engage in higher level of study. It is understandable that the general quality of people in a country will improve and its economy will benefit both now and in years to follow.
If the burden of supporting children’s higher education is dumped on parents and students, thousands of brilliant students will be deprived of chances to pursue their academic inspiration. Among those who suffer would definitely be future great scientists, business managers, artists and statesmen. The loss will be disastrous and irreversible.
In conclusion, the idea that students should also pay the full cost of their study is wrong and harmful because it is wrong to assume that higher education necessarily equalize high income. Moreover, it is in the best interest of a nation to take responsibility in financing college education so that the goal of higher education will be better met.