1.

In many countries plastic shopping bags are the main source of rubbish,
causing pollution on land and in the water, so people think they should
be banned. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Pollution is an all-time high problem faced by world nations and plastic is one of the
major causes. As plastic carry bags, mainly from shops, contribute a major portion of waste
getting dumped in many countries, most of such nations have policies to stop the usage of
these bags. I totally agree with those rules considering the detrimental effects it can cause to
nature.

To begin with, the main reason behind the ban of synthetic bags is that these
materials do not decompose like organic materials. Therefore, authorities find it difficult to
manage or recycle such waste. Secondly, the people start to obliterate plastic waste by
burning them, which in turns pollute water and soil in their locality. For instance, annual
environmental studies of Britian show that sea water are mainly polluted with inorganic carry
bags thrown by beach strollers. Since, water, land and air are the main resources for the
existence of life, it is high time to save them from getting polluted by imposing a ban on
plastic.

Furthermore, In some countries, shopping bags, made up of other bio-degradable

materials like clothes, or low-quality plastic, is available which can be easily disposed without
creating any atmospheric pollution. For example, in a mass-populated country like India,
shoppers use paper cover to carry their items after shopping. Along with a ban on plastic, the
India government has also implemented subsidies to encourage the manufacturing of paper
bags.

To sum up, in my opinion plastic shopping bags should be banned across the globe,
considering the huge increase of such garbage in next few years. I would suggest people to
depend on alternate methods to carry along for shopping, also not to try burning plastics.
2. Governments should invest in science, technology or business instead of
arts. Do you agree or disagree with the statement ?
It is said that government funding for education should give preference to science-
based subjects over others, in an attempt to help boost a countries future development and
progress. Although an increase in scientific developments can have many benefits to national
progress, this essay disagrees that science is the primary contributor.

There is no question that the advent of modern science has brought with it a number
of improvements to the way that countries and societies function. For example, increases in
electrical and computer based technologies have led to much more streamlined and efficient
workplaces. Computers and computerized machinery can now do the work of what would
have previously been carried out by humans, allowing greater efficiency and higher
productivity output. Another benefit that modern science has granted is the development of
renewable energy. Sources of renewable energy, such as solar and wind generated power,
are beginning to help ease the planet’s reliance on fossil fuels.

That being said, an increase in scientific education and development must not be  the
main measure of a country’s progress. It can be seen that the study of many other disciplines
of education can also attribute to a countries progress. Take for example, the Arts and
Humanities. Subjects such as History and Philosophy have allowed us to gain a better
understanding of humanity and can help to gain more insight into how we can move forward
as a race. Other subjects such as the Arts, allow societies and individuals to express
themselves creatively through mediums such as music, film and other art forms. It can be
argued that this can also help to improve the quality of people’s lives and therefore help
towards a countries overall development.

In conclusion, although developments in science have led to many beneficial

advantages for most countries, science alone is not the key contributor to a country’s
progress. In my opinion, most countries would benefit greater from a more well-rounded
education, with emphasis on all disciplines, not only that of science.

3. A company should limit its investments in social or environmental

initiatives because this takes away much of its profits. Do you agree or
disagree with the statement?
The investments in social or environmental initiatives can takes away much of a
company profits. But it's mandatory, because of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

CSR is a concept whereby organizations consider the interests of society by taking

responsibility for the impact of their activities on customers, employees, shareholders,
communities and the environment in all aspects of their operations. This obligation is seen to
extend beyond the statutory obligation to comply with legislation and sees organizations
voluntarily taking further steps to improve the quality of life for employees and their families
as well as for the local community and society at large. For example, Google has
demonstrated its commitment to the environment by investing in renewable energy sources
and sustainable offices. To demonstrate good business citizenship, firms can report
compliance with a number of CSR standards The scale and nature of the benefits of CSR for
an organization can vary depending on the nature of the enterprise, and are difficult to
quantify, though there is a large body of literature exhorting business to adopt measures
beyond financial ones CSR may be based within the human resources, business
development or public relations departments of an organization, or may be given a separate
unit reporting to the CEO or in some cases directly to the board.

In conclusion, Most companies should practice some form of corporate social and
environmental responsibility. So that we can build a better society.
4. Many people argue that an ethical business has more chances to be
successful than an unethical company does. Do you agree or disagree?
5. Most companies should practice some form of corporate social and
environmental responsibility. Do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
6. Climate change is a serious problem facing mankind today. What are its
causes and what measures can be taken to address this problem?
7. Learning a foreign language offers an insight into how people from other
cultures think and see the world. The teaching of a foreign language should
be compulsory at all primary schools.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?
Many people are arguing about studying a different talk. According to some people, it
should be optional in schools, but others believe that teachers should teach a foreign tongue
to children in schools. In my opinion, I agree with the idea of learning a different conversation
as their primary subjects.
 On the one hand, it is a chance to become a bilingual that is an additional skill, which
is good for getting a better job in the future. In a globalized world, having an occupation is not
easier than the past, therefore many entrepreneurs are looking for intelligent people who
have a lot of certificates and additional skills. As a result, learning foreign words can be a
great tool to be qualified when they get jobs. To add more that, they can understand about
different cultures. They can develop the ability of comprehend aspect of other people’s
lifestyle and respect them. Consequently, they may make friends who live apart from them. It
is an excellent method to communicate with different friends and improve their social skills.
On the other hand, the number of people who teach a foreign conversation by private tutoring
can decrease. The amount of online education or private tutors to teach different words
cannot have stable income. Additionally, it can lead to the process of economic can decrease.

To sum up, there are some drawbacks of studying a foreign word. However, it is a
good way to become their children more intelligent and it will be helpful for getting their stable
jobs in the future.
8. Every year several languages die out. Some people think that it is not
important because life will be easier if there are fewer languages in the
world. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Life is thought by some to be less complicated when the amount of language spoken
around the world is reduced, even as it is proven that a handful of them are found to be non-
existent each year. I agree with this thought even though there may be a disadvantage to it.

To begin with, having fewer languages will edge the world of globalization. This is
because there would be lesser communication barriers, leading to more international travel,
interracial marriages and relocation of residence. For example, a Nigerian who only speaks
English, can be encouraged to travel to the Britain, and because he loves the weather and
can communicate effectively, he decides to relocate to the new nation, gets married, and
spend the remainder of his life there. This may be impossible if he speaks his dialect.

In addition, there will better comity of nations. This will douse international tensions
as the leadership of these lands will likely understand themselves better. For example, US-
China trade war may not be so intense if they had a more common factor. The two world
powers would rather battle climate change by contributing their enormous resources and
trade benefits towards this worthy cause rather than antagonising each other commercially.

However, extinguishing some lingua Franca can lead to global cultural loss. This will
be attributed to an unintentional acceptance of the new lower amount culture associated with
the new and dominant language, leading to the loss of the weaker one be lost. For example,
the Yoruba will gradually obliterate the memory of their culture as they speak more English
and invariably accepting their views and perception of life. That would occur if this issue has
not occurred

In conclusion, Dying out of a language can be very beneficial to the global

community but it comes with its repercussion. It should be that, they are learnt without
necessarily leaving out each person's dialect.
9. Some think that students must travel to another country in order to learn
its language and customs. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
10. Pros and cons of polymeric products
 widely used advanced materials, which are found almost in every material used in our
daily life. To date, the importance of polymers has been much more highlighted because of
their applications in different dominions of sciences, technologies and industry. The main aim
of this essay is to accentuate the pragmatic impacts of polymers in human daily life.

Polymers are commonly referred to as plastics so now you can put in to perspective
how much we use polymers. You can also realize how damaged and different our world would
be with out polymers. Polymers such as plastics have changed the way we do things in our
society for the better. With the use of polymers scientist were able to create an effective and
cost efficient substitute for metals and ivory, which we used to use for making common items
such as handles, pool balls, and game pieces. They were all made of ivory and since ivory is
very rare and hard to obtain it raises the prices of all items made of this material. With out
plastics plates, cups and silverware would still be being made of metals or other expensive
material. But eventually people started replacing these things with plastic. Which is easier to
make and cheaper to buy. Over all plastic has countless uses and is currently used to make
many objects with out it a lot of items would not be able to be mass produced and would not
be affordable to the majority of the people.

In conclusion, polymeric products have many pros and cons. We all need they for
every day use, but also reduce for nature environment
11. Causes, consequences of dying dialects or languages; solutions
12. Benefits of understanding cultures when doing business abroad
13. State your opinion about the saying:" If a business wants to innovate
and stay competitive in the world, it needs to become more tolerant of risk
and uncertainty".
14. Causes, consequences of species extinction, solutions
15. Regenerative medicine is the best way to treat serious ailments. Do you
agree or disagree?
16. Ways to deal with household waste