If a product is good and meets customer needs,then people will

buy it. So advertising is unnecessary and no more than

entertainment. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some argue that if a product is of good quality and meets consumer

needs, advertising is redundant and serves only as entertainment. I
strongly disagree with this view, as advertising not only informs
purchasing decisions but also strengthens brand identity and
promotes broader social awareness.

Firstly, advertising remains essential in helping consumers navigate

the wide variety of choices available in today’s markets. With
countless products offering similar functions, customers may
struggle to identify which option best suits their needs. Effective
advertising provides clear information about features, advantages,
and unique selling points, enabling people to make informed decisions.
For businesses, this process translates into greater visibility and
increased sales, particularly for companies whose products genuinely
deliver value.

In addition, advertising plays a crucial role in building brand

recognition and long-term trust. By maintaining a consistent
presence across media platforms, firms can remain at the forefront
of customers’ minds. For example, a company that launches a
well-designed campaign not only attracts immediate attention but
also fosters familiarity and credibility. This sustained exposure
encourages repeat purchases and customer loyalty, ensuring stable
revenue streams over time.

Beyond commercial purposes, advertising can also serve important

educational and social functions. Campaigns that highlight public
health or environmental issues, such as anti-smoking messages or
promotions encouraging recycling, demonstrate how advertising can
influence behavior in positive ways. By shaping public attitudes and
discouraging harmful practices, these initiatives contribute to
healthier and more sustainable societies.

In conclusion, advertising is far from unnecessary. While strong

products are vital for customer satisfaction, effective advertising
ensures that consumers are aware of them, fosters lasting brand
loyalty, and can even deliver valuable social messages. For these
reasons, it is clear that advertising serves purposes well beyond
mere entertainment.

Mobile phones and the Internet bring a lot of benefits to people

nowadays. However, older people use them the least. In what
aspects do mobile phones and the internet benefit older people?
How can we encourage them to use these technologies?

Although mobile phones and the Internet provide enormous benefits,

older adults tend to use them less frequently than younger
generations. This essay will outline the key advantages these
technologies can offer the elderly and suggest measures to
encourage greater adoption.

One of the most important benefits is enhanced social connection.

Many older people face mobility limitations, making it difficult to
meet family and friends in person. This often leads to isolation and
even mental health problems. With smartphones and online
platforms, however, they can stay in touch easily through video calls
or messaging applications. Such interaction not only helps maintain
close relationships but also reduces loneliness and supports
emotional well-being.

Another major advantage is improved access to healthcare. Older

adults are more likely to suffer from chronic conditions, yet visiting
hospitals or clinics regularly can be physically demanding. Mobile
devices and the Internet provide convenient access to telemedicine
services, enabling patients to consult doctors, monitor conditions,
and receive medical advice from home. Reliable only sources also
allow them to learn more about treatment options, which helps them
take a more active role in managing their health and thereby
improves their overall quality of life.

To encourage greater use, several strategies should be implemented.

Governments and community organisations could run training
programmes specifically designed for seniors, demonstrating how to
use smartphones and online services in practical ways. This hands-on
approach would increase their confidence and willingness to adopt
new tools. In addition, financial support such as subsidies for mobile
devices or discounted Internet packages could make technology
more affordable, particularly for those on limited pensions.

In conclusion, mobile phones and the Internet can transform the

lives of older people by fostering stronger social ties and providing
easier access to healthcare. With targeted education and financial
assistance, more elderly individuals are likely to embrace these
technologies and enjoy their considerable benefits.

In some countries, more and more shops are open longer hours
everyday. What are the positive and negative developments of
this?
In many countries, an increasing number of retail stores are
extending their operating hours to accommodate consumer demands.
While this trend offers undeniable conveniences and economic
benefits, it also brings about several negative consequences that
merit consideration.

On the other hand, longer business hours significantly enhance

consumer convenience and stimulate economic growth. In an era of
fast-paced lifestyles, many individuals struggle to find time for
shopping during traditional business hours due to work commitments.
By operating late into the night or even around the clock, stores
cater to diverse customer needs, ensuring greater accessibility and
flexibility. Additionally, extended hours generate more employment
opportunities, as retailers must hide additional staff to manage
shifts, thereby reducing unemployment rates. For instance, in
metropolitan cities such as New York or Tokyo, 24-hour convenience
stores provide essential goods at all times, benefiting night-shift
workers and emergency shoppers alike. Moreover, businesses that
stay open longer often see increased revenue, as they capitalize on
consumer spending habits that fluctuate throughout the day.

On the other hand, while the economic advantages are evident,

prolonged store hours come with significant downsides, particularly
concerning employee welfare and operational costs. Extended shifts
can lead to employee burnout, as workers are required to work
irregular hours, often compromising their work-life balance and
mental well-being. A prime example is South Korea, where relentless
work schedules and late-night business operations have been linked
to high stress levels among retail employees. Furthermore,
maintaining a store for longer durations incurs higher costs for
electricity, security, and wages, which could lead to increased
product prices to offset these expenses. Additionally, the rise of
round-the-clock retail culture may encourage excessive
consumerism, fostering unhealthy spending habits and environmental
concerns due to increased resource consumption.

In conclusion, while longer shop hours enhance convenience and

contribute to economic prosperity, they can also impose challenges,
including employee strain, heightened operational costs, and
potential social repercussions.

People who decide on a career path early in their lives and keep
to it are more likely to have a satisfying working life than those
who change jobs frequently. To what extent do you agree or
disagree?

A stable career trajectory is often associated with long-term job

satisfaction, while frequent job changes are sometimes perceived as
disruptive. While there are undeniable benefits to committing to a
single career path from an early stage, I strongly believe that
adapting to different jobs throughout one’s working life offers
greater fulfillment in the modern world.

On the one hand, those who choose a career early and remain
dedicated to it can indeed enjoy certain advantages. Firstly,
long-term commitment fosters expertise and career progression.
Individuals who devote years to mastering a specific profession are
more likely to attain senior positions, financial stability, and industry
recognition, all of which contribute to job satisfaction. For instance,
doctors and lawyers, who often follow a linear career path, typically
experience a sense of accomplishment as they reach the pinnacle of
their professions. Secondly, job stability provides a sense of
security and reduces the stress of constant job hunting. Employees
who stay in one industry develop strong professional networks and
deep knowledge in their fields, which makes their work more
manageable and rewarding over time.

On the other hand, I contend that career flexibility leads to a more

fulfilling professional life, particularly in today’s rapidly evolving job
market. Changing jobs allows individuals to explore different
interests and find work that truly aligns with their passions. Many
people who initially commit to a career later discover that their
interests evolve, and switching jobs enables them to pursue roles
that better suit their aspirations. Moreover, transitioning between
careers enhances personal growth by exposing individuals to diverse
work environments and skill sets. Adaptability is increasingly valuable
in the modern workforce, where industries are continuously
reshaped by technological advancements. Those who embrace change
often find greater excitement and motivation in their work, which
ultimately enhances job satisfaction.

In conclusion, while following a single career path from an early

stage can provide job security and steady career growth, I firmly
believe that the ability to explore multiple jobs offers a more
fulfilling and dynamic working life. The modern workforce values
adaptability, and those who embrace career changes are more likely
to find work that aligns with their evolving skills and passions.

People who decide on a career path early in their lives and keep
to it are more likely to have a satisfying working life than those
who change jobs frequently. To what extent do you agree or
disagree?
Some argue that all criminals should be incarcerated, while others
believe that those with valuable skills should be required to
contribute to society through work. Both perspectives have merit, as
imprisonment ensures justice and deterrence, whereas utilizing
offenders’ talents can yield social benefits. This essay will explore
both views before presenting my own opinion.

On the one hand, imprisonment serves as an effective deterrent and

a means of delivering justice. Locking up criminals, particularly those
who commit serious offenses such as murder or armed robbery,
prevents them from posing further harm to society. Additionally,
strict sentencing reinforces the rule of law and discourages
potential offenders. For example, countries with stringent penalties,
such as Singapore, have lower crime rates due to the fear of severe
consequences. Furthermore, incarceration ensures that victims and
their families receive justice, as they see offenders punished for
their wrongdoing. Without prison sentences, there would be a risk of
criminals repeating their offenses, endangering public safety.

On the other hand, allowing skilled offenders to work instead of

serving time could be a more pragmatic approach in certain cases.
Many individuals convicted of non-violent crimes, such as financial
fraud or cybercrime, possess expertise that could be redirected for
social benefit. For instance, reformed hackers have been employed
by cybersecurity firms to help prevent cyberattacks. Similarly,
programs that engage white-collar criminals in community service or
economic development projects can turn their skills into positive
contributions rather than wasting their potential behind bars. This
approach not only rehabilitates offenders but also reduces the
financial burden on the state, as maintaining prisons is costly.
In my view, a balanced approach is necessary. While incarceration is
essential for dangerous criminals, alternative sentencing should be
considered for those whose talents can serve the public good. By
assessing each case individually, authorities can ensure justice while
maximizing societal benefits.

Some feel that it is important for all adults to engage in the

arts in their free time as a hobby. Others disagree. Discuss
both views and give your own opinion.

Some argue that every adult should engage in artistic activities

during their free time, while others believe such pursuits are
neither practical nor necessary. Although creative hobbies
undoubtedly offer psychological and social benefits, I am convinced
that participation should remain a matter of personal choice rather
than obligation.

Advocates of universal adult involvement in the arts emphasize the

therapeutic role of creativity. In an era where professional and
personal demands often cause stress and isolation, painting, singing,
or playing an instrument can act as a powerful antidote. These
activities encourage individuals to immerse themselves in a task that
fosters concentration and emotional release, thereby alleviating
anxiety. Furthermore, they can strengthen social ties, since joining a
choir or attending art class brings people together, providing
opportunities for meaningful interaction. From this perspective,
artistic hobbies enrich not only individual well-being but also
community cohesion.
Nevertheless, requiring all adults to participate in the arts is
neither feasible nor desirable. First, many art forms demand
financial investment in materials or training, which is not affordable
for everyone. Mandating such engagement could divert resources
away from more essential priorities such as education, healthcare, or
housing. More importantly, personal inclination varies widely. While
some thrive in artistic environments, others may find fulfillment in
sports, gardening, or volunteering. Forcing individuals into creative
activities risks undermining the very sense of enjoyment and
relaxation that hobbies are intended to provide. Ultimately, leisure
should serve as an expression of autonomy rather than conformity.

In conclusion, while artistic activities can certainly nurture mental

health and social connection, they are not universally suitable or
accessible. Adults should be free to select pastimes that best align
with their preferences and circumstances. Respecting this diversity
not only preserves individual freedom but also ensures a healthier
and more balanced society.