United Kingdom,
London
Should governments spend money on art, when they have so many other important issues and concerns?
Art is a basic human need. Governments have a responsibility to spend money on art for their citizens. Throughout the ages, man has tried to create beauty through painting, music, sculpture and other artistic expression. It seems to be a basic need of humans to surround themselves with art. However some people feel that government money spent on art is wasted, particularly when there are so many other demands on it. This essay will examine the conflict between those who say art is important and those who feel it is a waste of money.
It can be wrong for governments to spend large sums of money on art. Too often, governments spend unwisely. They spend money on art not because a picture is good or a museum is needed, but for political reasons. Cities end up with huge statues or empty expensive buildings that are used only by a few people. Another point is that the artworks are often chosen to represent social or political rather than artistic ideas. The city gets yet another statue of the leader or an ugly monument to national aspirations. A third point is that governments often respond to fashions, and tastes in art can change very rapidly. Without careful advice an expensive collection of worthless paintings or tasteless productions can be the result.
However, it would be wrong to say that governments should not spend any money at all on art. Painters, musicians, and composers cannot survive without financial support. Rich people or large companies do finance art, but then it is often inaccessible to ordinary people. Governments have a duty to make this art available to everyone. However, the most important reason why governments should support the arts is because an appreciation of art is one of the things that makes life worthwhile. Humans do not need just shelter and food.
Creative people have always tried to look at things in a new way and to make the world a better place through painting, music, poetry, calligraphy, sculpture, dance, and numerous other forms of expression. While art may not make us immortal, it does make the world a richer place for future generations.
In conclusion, although people do not to be provided with the necessities of life, such as housing and medical cars, governments also have a duty to provide their citizens with something more. They should make sure that they pass on beauty, ideas and expression to the next generation and make art available to all instead of being the possession of only the few. I firmly believe that spending money on art is a vital part of a government’s responsibility, and I am confident that my country will be able to contribute its share to the richness of the world’s art and creativity.
Repetition
Art is a basic human need. Governments have a responsibility to spend money on art for their citizens.
Many people’s lives are richer because of art - music, paintings, calligraphy, pictures, sculpture, poems and dance. However, some people feel that governments should be spending money on housing, medical care, or defence, instead of on art. This essay will discuss whether governments should or should not spend money on the arts.
There are several reasons why governments should not finance artists. First of all, artists should have to follow the same rules as the rest of the market. If there is a demand for their music or sculpture, then they will be rich. Secondly, politicians generally do not have good taste. They will waste public money on popular art or on their own preferences. But the main reason why governments should minimize spending on the art world is that there are more important areas like housing, roads, hospitals and factories which need the money first.
However, it would be wrong to say that governments should not spend any money at all on art. Everybody needs some beauty in their life, but not everyone can afford a Picasso or a piece of music. Governments should provide money for museums or concert halls for everyone. Another point is that .art allows people to express themselves and this is good for society, culture and thought. Thirdly, artists can be good for the economy by producing music, films, and attracting tourists.
All in all, governments should prioritize their spending carefully, but they should also allocate some of their budget for art. It is part of their duty to society and to future generations.
In the fight against crime, police forces and governments are increasingly using security cameras in public places. Some people are opposed to this, saying that it invades our privacy. What do you think?
Security cameras have become ubiquitous in many countries. Whereas before they appeared only in banks and at high security areas, they are now entering public places such as mails, streets, stadiums and transport. Many people feel this affects their privacy. This essay will examine whether the advantages of these cameras outweigh their negative impact.
Surveillance cameras have several benefits. An obvious benefit is that the police can catch criminals in the act, thus reducing crime. This will make the streets safer for ordinary people. A more important point is that criminals, particularly young offenders or petty criminals will be deferred. They will not be tempted to carry out crimes, and thus society will be a lot safer. Cameras are also cost-effective and unobtrusive. Authorities do not need to spend large amounts of money on police.
However, security cameras are far from being a perfect solution. The biggest objection concerns privacy. Many people feel that they should be free to travel or move around a shop, mall, street or country without being photographed or recorded. They feel that being watched constantly is like being in a jail, and that ordinary people are losing their freedom because of these devices. Another point is that although the police say that only criminals have something to fear from the cameras, many people do not trust governments with too much information. Corrupt authorities could use information in the wrong way or twist it to victimize some groups. Thirdly, cameras and computers can make mistakes.
In conclusion, although there are definite advantages to using surveillance devices such as cameras, we need to balance the need for security with respect for the individual’s privacy and freedom. If we do not trust the members of society, a situation like George Orwell’s “1984” could be the result.
Should dangerous sports such as boxing or motor-racing be banned?
Millions of people sport every day, and, inevitably, some suffer injury or pain. Most players and spectators accept this risk. However, some people would like to see dangerous sports such as boxing banned. This essay will examine some of the reasons for banning certain sports.
Some sports are nothing but an excuse for violence. Boxing is a perfect example. The last thing an increasingly violent world needs is more violence on our television. The sight of two men (or even women) bleeding, with faces ripped open, trying to obliterate each other is barbaric. Other sports, such as American football or rugby, are also barely-concealed violence.
Some people argue that the players can choose to participate. However this is not always the case. Many boxers, for example, come from disadvantaged background. They are lured by money or by social or peer pressure and then cannot escape. Even in richer social groups, schools force unwilling students to play aggressive team sports, claiming that playing will improve the students’ character (or the school’s reputation), but in fact increasing the risk of injury.
Even when people can choose, they sometimes need to be protected against themselves. Most people approve of governments’ efforts to reduce smoking. In the same way, governments need to act if there are unacceptably high levels of injuries in sports such as football, diving, mountaineering, or motor-racing.I accept that all sports involve challenge and risk. However violence and aggression should not be permitted in the name of sport. Governments and individuals must act to limit brutally and violence, so that children and adults can enjoy and benefit from sport.
Is Education Being Devalued?
In the past, degrees were very unusual in my family. I remember the day my uncle graduated. We had a huge party, and for many years my mother called him “the genius” and listened to his opinion. Today, in comparison five of my brothers and sisters have degrees, and two are studying for their masters’. However, some people think that this increased access to education is devaluing degrees. In this essay, I will look at some of the arguments for and against the increased emphasis on degrees in our society.
People have several arguments against the need for degrees. They say that having so many graduates devalues a degree. People lose respect for the degree holder. It is also claimed that education has become a rat race. Graduates have to compete for jobs even after years of studying. Another point is that studying for such a long time leads to learners becoming inflexible. They know a lot about one narrow subject, but are unable to apply their skills. Employers prefer more flexible and adaptable workers.
However, I feel strongly that this move to having more qualifications is a positive development. In the past education was only for the rich and powerful. Now it is available to everyone, and this will have many advantages for the country and the individual. First of all, it is impossible to be over educated.
The more people are educated, the better the world will be, because people will be able to discuss and exchange ideas. A further point is that people with degrees have many more opportunities. They can take a wider variety of jobs and do what they enjoy doing, instead of being forced to take a job they dislike. Finally, a highly educated worldforce is good for the economy of the country. It attracts foreign investment.in conclusion, although there are undoubtedly some problems with increased levels of education, I feel strongly that the country can only progress if all its people are educated to the maximum of their ability.
School Dropouts: Problems and Solutions.
Most students in the UAE complete school, a large number still drop out because of family, social and work pressures. This problem requires serious action from both individuals and the government.Most students who do not complete school do so because of family problems. Girls, especially, want to get married and start a family. Some parents are not interested in education and do not support their children in studying. Social problems are also a continuing factor.
Education is compulsory but, despite this, some people do not take it seriously. Furthermore, jobs are available even if students do not have a good education. The third reason is work pressure. Some families are poor and need their children to work in order to increase the income. All these problems will create young people who do not have any skills and who will not be able to improve their lives for the family and the country.
There are several things that can be done about these problems. Parents should be encouraged to send their children to school. Schools with baby-minded facilities should be opened specially for married students The governments needs to stress the importance of education and even offer financial support to students to continue. This will encourage students to stay at school rather than start working.
Drug abuse is becoming a problem in our society. What are the causes of this and what are some solutions?
Drug abuse is rife in many countries. Billions of dollars are spent internationally preventing drug use, treating addicts, and fighting drug-related crime. Although drugs threaten many societies, their effects can also be combated successfully. This essay looks at some of the effects of drug use on society, and suggests some solutions to the problem.
Drug abuse causes multiple problems for countries and communities. The medical and psychological effects are very obvious. Addicts cannot function as normal members of society. They neglect or abuse their families, and eventually require expensive treatment or hospitalization. The second effect is on crime. Huge police resources are needed to fight smuggling and dealing. Criminal gangs and mafia underworlds develop with the money from drugs.
However, the menace of drugs can be fought. Education is the first battle. Children need to be told at home and in school about drugs. People need to be aware of the effects so that they can make avoid this problem. A second approach is or increase police manpower and powers to stop dealers and to enforce the law.
However the main target should be the user. Families and counselors need to talk to children and people at risk. Parents need to look at their children and help them. Jobs are needed to give people a role in society.In conclusion, although the problem of drugs may seem impossible to eliminate, there are concrete steps that can be taken to weaken the hold of drugs on society. The danger from drugs is too great to ignore.
Is Education Losing its Value?
Today it seems to be universally accepted that increased education is a good thing. Thousands of companies and millions of students spend vast amounts of time and money chasing pieces of paper. But what is the value of these qualifications? This essay will discuss whether education has been devalued.
Supporters of education (usually teachers or educators, or those in the business of education) say increased levels of education will open doors for students. Certificates, diplomas and degrees are held up status symbol, a passport to a private club of money and power.
However, the truly powerful are not those with degrees, but people who stand back and look at what is more important in life. These people are found in every part of society. Like many brilliant people, Einstein was a weak math student. Like many successful businessmen, Bill Gates never completed college. Like many inventive and creative people, Edison never went to school. The greatest religious teachers do not have letters after their name. Similarly many of the world’s political leaders do not have master’s degrees or doctorate. These are the people who shape our lives, and they are too busy with real life to spend time in the purchase.
Students in college are being sold an illusion. They are made to believe that self- understanding and society approval will come with the acquisition of a piece of paper. Instead of thinking for themselves, and finding their own personality and strengths, they are fitted like square pegs into round holes, in so-called professional jobs. The role of education is to prepare masses on people to operate at low levels of ability in a very limited and restricted range of activities. Some of these activities are perhaps more challenging than the assembly lines of the past, but the ultimate purpose is equally uninteresting. More worryingly, despite the increased level of education, people are still not genuinely expected to think for themselves. In fact, the longer years of schooling make the job of brainwashing even easier.
There is still a role for study, research and education. However, we need to examine our emphasis on education for the sake of a piece of paper, and to learn the real meaning and revolutionary challenge of knowledge.
Animal Testing.
Animal testing may be necessary, but we need to be merciful. Even/ year, millions of animals undergo painful suffering or death as a result of scientific research into the effects of drugs, food additives, cosmetics and other chemical products. While most people think animal testing is necessary, others are upset by what they see as needless suffering. This essay looks at some of the positive and negative aspects of animal testing.
Many medical treatments and procedures have been developed from experiments on animals. Since animals share many features with humans, scientists use animals to test the safety and effectiveness of newly developed drugs before pilot testing on small groups of patients. Medical teams practice new operating techniques such as transplants on animals. Without animal testing, many procedures or new drugs would be extremely unsafe.
However, many people are concerned that animals are suffering unnecessarily and cruelty. They do not believe that every new drug needs to be tested on animals, especially with the huge database of knowledge and modern computer models. They also are worried that many animal tests are ineffective, pointing out that any drugs have had to be withdrawn from the market despite extensive testing. They particularly feel that animal testing should not be used for non- essential products such as cosmetics, shampoos, soaps, and cleaning products. Furthermore, some campaigns would like to see certain tests replaced and more human methods used.
We need to take sure that the millions of animals who are used for testing now products are treated with minimum of suffering. Although some animal testing be unavoidable at present, treating our fellow creatures as mercifully as possible will demonstrate our humanity.
Should dangerous sports be banned?
Today, many sports are becoming increasingly regulated. Boxing, rugby, soccer, and other games are being targeted by sports bodies and medical organizations in an effort to improve safety standards and to reduce injuries. However, for some people, this is not enough, and they would rather see some dangerous sports to be banned completely. In this essay, I will examine some arguments against banning dangerous sports.
Sports, competition, and games seem to be natural to humans. Young children learn their own limits and strengths through play with others, but they also learn valuable social lessons about what acceptable behavior and the rights of others. Sport therefore is not just a physical phenomenon, but a mental and social one.
Challenging sport provides a healthy, largely safe, physical outlet for aggression. There is very little evidence to show that people who take part in dangerous sports become violent as a result. In fact it is more likely that apart from the many friendships created in playing, sport acts as a safety valve for a society by reducing stress. Moreover, sport teaches and requires discipline, training, and respect for the rules - valuable lessons in any society.
Almost all sports involve some risk. Young rugby players are paralysed every year in scrums. Scuba diving accidents can lead to brain damage or death. Even golf or jogging can lead to pain or injury. Without some elements of risk or challenge, sport becomes meaningless. A marathon runner trying to improve his time, basketball players fiercely battling an opposing team, or a sky-diving team defying gravity - all are trying to push themselves to their maximum. There is therefore no sport without danger.
There is also the issue of freedom. Without a wide range of sports, many people would feel trapped or limited. People should be free to participate in activities with others as long as it does not affect the safety of non-participants.
There also should be limits to the power of governments to ban sports. If one sport is banned because of alleged danger, than what sport would be next? Boxing is the most common target of opponents of dangerous sports. But if boxing is banned, would motor racing follow, then rugby, wrestling, or weightlifting? Furthermore, many sports would got underground, leading to increased injury and illegal gambling.
Nobody denies that regulation is needed. Medical bodies have introduced safety rules in boxing, in soccer, and these safety regulations have been welcomed by players. But the role of government should be reduced.In conclusion, our society would be healthier if more people took part in sports of all kinds. We should continue to try to prevent accidents and injuries. However, we should also ensure that sports are challenging, exciting, and, above all, fun.
