Some people believe that the government should spend more money putting in more works of art like

paintings and statues in cities to make them better places to live in.
To what extent do you agree?

A school of thought suggests that the government should divert additional funding to add more
artworks in urban areas to make them more worthy of living. While I accept that this suggestion
is valid to some extent, the money used could be put to better use to overcome other
more immediate problems of cities.

Those advocating the idea of having more works of art in urban spaces base their arguments on
psychological grounds. It is a reality that cities are normally notorious for being concrete
jungles featuring soulless gray building blocks. Such a scenery creates undesirable living
conditions for urban dwellers as it might not form a sentimental connection between residents
and their environs, and stimulates little to no artistic inspiration. By embellishing streets and
public spaces with sculptures or paintings, the government can add soul to the inner city and
generally improve the cityscape. Such an improvement can make city life somewhat more
desirable because it has been proven that aesthetically pleasing
scenery would enhance people’s moods.

Nevertheless, I believe such an initiative should only

be implemented in industrialized countries where the national coffer is abundant,
in underdeveloped nations, however, the state should be more fiscally responsible about
their decisions. One reason for this belief is that cities worldwide, especially in third-world
countries, often suffer from a great number of problems, namely accommodation
shortages, inflated prices of real estate, traffic congestion, and rampant unemployment.
Therefore, the national budget of these nations should be channeled into housing construction,
road expansion, and economic stimulation to address the housing crisis, deflate the property
bubble, ease vehicle clogs, and create more jobs. Experiencing art is a luxury that citizens of
poor countries cannot yet, and should not yet afford.

In conclusion, while arts certainly exert positive effects on mental health and therefore artistic
creations should be displayed in cities to improve people’s living conditions, such an initiative is
partly unnecessary for underdeveloped nations and the funding there should be utilized to
tackle other troubles plaguing urban space.
People think that government should increase the cost of fuel for cars and other vehicles
to solve environmental problems. Give your opinion.
A school of thought holds that environmental degradation could be tackled by raising the
cost of vehicle fuel. While I believe this measure could hamper the trouble to some
extent, education is a more holistic approach.
It is understandable why some believe that a higher cost of petrol could address
environmental issues. Their argument might be predicated on the assumption that exhaust
fume discharged from vehicles is among the leading causes of air contamination and the
greenhouse effect. By raising the price of fuel, the government could encourage daily
commuters to opt for public transport systems to avoid extra costs, thereby easing the two
said problems. Nonetheless, this solution does not sound because of the financial
repercussion that ensues. Higher costs of fuel drive up transportation costs, thus
increasing commodity prices, which places a heavy financial burden on people in the
low-income bracket, especially in third-world nations where social security is
underdeveloped. The poor might starve to death before dying of rising temperatures.
For the reason mentioned above, education emerges as a more effective measure to
address environmental issues without causing social disturbances. The government
should incorporate lessons heightening environmental awareness into curriculums to
educate the new generation about the grave danger that humanity is facing and the
urgency of environmental conservation. Norway has adopted this measure since 2009 and
it has witnessed considerable growth in the number of students enrolling in majors
relating to environmental protection, promising a future with advanced technology and
science that can contribute to the collective endeavor of reversing global warming. Also,
since these young people will grow up and act as role models to their children, the impact
of such an initiative will reverberate through generations to come
In conclusion, while setting higher taxes on petrol could act as a stopgap measure against
environmental deterioration, it, unfortunately, entails unwanted byproducts. Therefore, in
terms of long-term goal, the government should focus on teaching children to protect the
environment to engender greater progress.
Some people think that children should begin their formal education at a very early
age. Some think they should begin at 7 years old at least. Discuss both views and
give ur opinion.
It is suggested by some that children should embark on their academic journey as soon as
possible, while others are convinced that only those who are seven and above ought to
start formal schooling. I gravitate toward the second suggestion, as forcing children under
7 to attend school is of little pragmatic utility.
Those who advocate early schooling might argue the benefits it can offer children. The
first merit is that during the first few years of their formative period, children interact
with the world and explore their surroundings through their senses. If this process is
facilitated, supervised, and guided by experienced teachers, those going to school at the
age of 5 or 6 can have a better understanding of life sooner compared to their stay-at-
home counterparts. In addition, at school, young schoolers can participate in numerous
educational activities with their peers, allowing them to develop their social skills and
their cognitive abilities through basic arithmetic or making sentences. Such early
exposure to academic settings can give children going to school early a head start,
propelling academic excellence in higher education levels.
Nonetheless, people who believe schools are only suitable for children above six make an
opposing case, citing the stress that early education can cause. It can be argued that
schools can be a real stressor. This is because formal education is normally associated
with homework and regulations, creating unnecessary pressure for children, and
deleteriously affecting their mental health. Another reason is that knowledge at schools
often requires a certain level of cognitive development to be fully comprehended,
therefore, sending children below 6 to school, whose cognition is not yet sufficiently
developed, can be a waste of time and money.
In conclusion, I believe that not until the age of 7 should young children be taught
formally; if anything, it would potentially be counter-productive
Countries should try to produce all the food for the population and import as little food as
possible. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is suggested that countries should prioritize food self-efficiency and minimize their
dependency on imported food. While there is a certain degree of impracticality and
inconvenience of this suggestion, being able to realize it can do significant wonders to the
environment and society, and therefore I completely agree with this suggestion. 

Admittedly, it might be impossible for countries to provide enough food for the whole
population. There are numerous factors preventing countries from achieving this, ranging from
distinct regional climatic characteristics to underdeveloped farming technology. For example,
many African countries often suffer from extreme drought and severe heat waves, coupled with
obsolete farming techniques and equipment, leading to crop failures. Also, countries in a
temperate climate might fail to propagate and produce high-yield tropical food. These nations
have to rely on the importation of food to prevent food shortages or to offer their citizens a wide
range of food selections. Minimizing imported food might take a toll on their national food
security. 

However, I believe nations worldwide should strive to ensure food security for the general
population by utilizing domestic food sources. An example underpinning this belief can be seen
in how food import dependency has caused severe food shortages in many nations such as
Germany or Holland during Covid 19 due to international lockdown, causing a price surge
because of low food supply and placing a heavy financial burden on people in the low-income
bracket. Whereas, in agricultural countries such as Vietnam or Thailand, citizens’ needs for food
were still met thanks to the effectiveness of government policies in managing and distributing
domestic food. In addition, it has been proven that the international transportation of food
products is the leading cause of environmental degradation because of the gargantuan amount of
exhaust fume discharged by vehicles involved in the process. If governments issue new
regulations limiting the importation of foreign food, food miles would be significantly reduced,
which contributes to the collective endeavor of humanity in reversing the global warming
process. 

In conclusion, while there are several drawbacks to minimizing food importation, governments
should do so to ensure social and environmental sustainability. 
Some people believe that no one should do the same job all their working life.
Others argue that doing the same job brings advantages for individuals, companies,
and society. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
A school of thought holds that life-long employment is not an ideal option, while others
claim that working the same job for an extended period of time offers conferred benefits
to workers, businesses, and society. I gravitate toward the latter point of view, for the
reason listed below.
It is understandable why some advocate job hopping. The first reason is that working the
same job for a prolonged period of time can be unstimulating. Employees after repeatedly
doing their work for years could reach a certain level of proficiency, which might result
in stagnation, leading to low morale and job dissatisfaction among those having the desire
for progress. Another reason is that spending the whole life working one job might
engender workers vulnerable to social turmoils. Rampant unemployment, especially in
the hospitality and tourism industry, during Covid 19 is a case in point. If a person spent
his whole career working as a tour guide, beyond communication skills, he might have
very few transferable skills for other high-income professions, leading to his
unemployment or gloomy personal financial situation.
Nonetheless, I believe one job for life does wonders for all parties involved. From an
individual perspective, seniority is often commensurate remuneration given the
experience and knowledge that one has accumulated over the span of their career.
Therefore those who commit to a job longer might secure a better financial edge over job
hoppers. From the business's point of view, staff royalty greatly benefits companies
because it allows them to not only minimize operation costs, including staff recruitment
and training expenses but also avoid internal disturbance caused by staff turnover.
Finally, a society where citizens have secured and well-paid jobs, and companies run
efficiently, is a thriving and prosperous one.
In conclusion, while there are several potential threats to workers if they commit to
a particular profession for more than 40 years, they are eclipsed by the merits of
such a course of action.
Why is happiness hard to defined?
What makes a happy life?

It can be argued that the ultimate goal of life is happiness. While the notion of happiness is
debatable and has yet reached a common consensus, there are certain factors constituting a happy
life that we can all agree upon. 

The definition of happiness varies because people perceive it differently depending on their
background and value. People from different social classes have different ideas about happiness.
To those who grew up in an underprivileged family and have accustomed to low standards of
living, a full belly and a decent roof above their head can be considered happiness, while people
from wealthy backgrounds normally associate happiness with owning multiple mansions and
driving the most expensive sports cars. Similarly, materialistic individuals would derive
immense satisfaction from financial gains, while spiritual ones could find happiness in practicing
religions. Such diversity in human society makes happiness an indefinite concept and could not
be measured by any standard. 

Despite the elusiveness of happiness, there are several requisite elements to it. The first element
is a healthy body. A person can hardly experience happiness if he or she is suffering from
illnesses or debilitating physical pains. A firm mind is also important. Crippling anxiety,
depression, and worries can severely interfere with the process of achieving happiness. The last
factor is the relationship with other people. Humans are social creatures, meaning that we find
reassurance and security in the accompany of our kind. The lack of positive social interaction
could create a sense of isolation and breeds multiple mental issues that meddle with our state of
mind, eventually hindering us from true happiness. 

In conclusion, happiness is hard to define because of its nature, and achieving it requires a
number of preconditions, namely a healthy body and mind, coupled with good rapport with the
surrounding community.

The government should ban fast food, agree or disagree?

Conventional wisdom has it that “ you are what you eat “. For this reason, some health-conscious
individuals suggest that unhealthy food and beverage should be legally removed from shops. I
believe while this suggestion is well-meaning, it creates more problems than which it could
potentially solve.
Admittedly, it is understandable why some decry the availability of unhealthy food on the
market. Their argument is predicated on the assumption that if those products are banned, people
will have to abandon their old eating habits and resort to a healthier alternative, thus creating a
healthier community. However, if such an initiative were carried out, unwanted byproducts
would follow. One of the most immediate consequences is unemployment. This is because
hundreds of millions of people globally are employed by companies producing sugary drinks or
fast food. Without permission to sell their products, the dissolution of these companies is
inevitable, consequently making countless people redundant. Between having to deal with some
overweight citizens or an epidemic of unemployment, the former certainly sounds much less
problematic.
To add further credence to my assertion, I also note that fast food, one of the most ubiquitous
types of unhealthy food, is a staple diet to many people from low-income brackets given its
convenience and affordability. For example, a single mother working a nine-to-five job with two
children has to rely on fast food to feed her family. Similarly, A college student with a minimum
wage part-time job after eight hours of school would find fast food the most viable solution.
These are only two examples of this demography. Unless the government can come up with
anything to solve this conundrum, banning food and drinks that are harmful to people’s health
would place extra burdens on deprived people's shoulders, which is already heavy as it is.
In conclusion, while removing unhealthy food and beverages from shelves and counters could
somewhat improve society’s physical health, there are unexpected and considerable
consequences from this action. Hence, it is unworthy of pursuing.
The bar chart illustrates how many men and women participating in 4 different courses at an education
center for adults in the year 2009. The pie chart shows the percentage of learners there catergorized into
different age groups.

Overall, Language was the most favoured subject by women, while painting was the most
chosen one by men. It is also clear that the majority of the learners of these classes were
senior citizens.

Regarding Drama, 20 women chose this class, while 10 men did so. 30 women picked painting,
compared to 25 of their male counterparts. In addition, The number of women learning
Language exceeded that of men by a large margin, with respective figures being 40 people and
20 people. The number of men opting for Sculpture was 10 students , which was 5 people
higher than their female counterparts.

Investigation into the pie graph reveals that the majority of students of these courses were those
50 and above, at 42%, ahead of people in their forties and thirties, with respective figures
being 26% and 16%. Finally, the percentages of learners in the age range of 20-29 and under 20
were lower, reported to be 11% and 5% in that order.
ADVANTAGE / DISADVANTAGE

General statement It is true that these days advertisements are becoming increasingly
pervasive in our daily life.
Opinion While there are certain disadvantages from this tendency, I
would argue that they are eclipsed by the benefits.
Topic Sentence Granted, the popularity of advertisements is disadvantageous to
some extents.
Luận điểm 1 One main demerit is that advetisements can be
counterproductive.
Reason/example This is because in order to promote their products, companies
have to post their advertisements on social media, streaming
platforms and street panels, which leads to people’s discomfort, in
turn encouraging them to boycott the product.
Luận điểm 2 In addition, advertisements being prevalent might negatively
affect consumers.
Reason/example A clear demonstration for this is since many businesses use false
information and manipulative marketing methods to advertiese
their products for financial gain, buyers might be allured into
buying these low quality products, which takes its toll on their
mental and financial situation.
Topic Sentence Despite the above-mentioned arguments, I believe that there are
some clear merits of this tendency.
Luận điểm 1 One reason for this belief is advertisement can bring companies
 money.
Reason/example This can be seen in the way that by advertising their products and
services, companies can increase their reputation as well as brand
awareness, which allows them to reach a wider range of potential
customers, hence promising increased revenue.
Luận điểm 2 Another convincing point is that advertising partly addresses the
issue of joblessness.
Reason/example Since this industry is blooming, agencies would required
additional positions such as designers, content creators and
marketers. Such a requirement creates vacancies in the labour
market, alleviating unemployment problem.
Conclusion 1 In conclusion, while there are indeed drawbacks posed by the
ubiquity of advertisements, its merits are more significant

Câu 2 ( optional )
The line chart illustrates the revenue of 4 dinning establishments over the course of 1 year.

Overall, there was an increase in the earnings of Delicacy, Evening Paradise, and Grand Fiesta, while the
opposite was true for that of Spicy Fortune. In addition, Spicy Fortune was the most profitable
restaurant in the first ten months, before being overtaken by Evening Paradise.

The income of Spicy Fortune started at 160,000$, after which it experienced a fall to exactly 120,000$ in
June, before ending the year at 50.000$. Opposite pattern can be seen in the figure for Grand Fiesta,
which decreased from 100.000$ in January to shy of 80.000$ after six months and rebounded to reach
138.000$ in December.

50.000$ was the revenue of Evening Paradise in January, with a subsequent growth to 95.000$ in July
and a final ascend to 190.000$. Identically, Delicacy made 30.000$ in the first month of the years,
followed by a fluctuation in the range from 20.000$ to 59.000$ between February and October, before
reaching its peak at 120.000$ in December.
The table shows the share of household income expended on 4 different domains
on a monthly basis in five European nations. 
Overall, five European countries spend the most money on Food and Drink and
Housing areas; meanwhile, clothing was is the least invested spending area in all 5
nations examined except for Turkey.
Turkey’s spending on Food and Drink accounts for 36%, followed by that of Spain
and the UK, which are 31% and 27%. The spendings on this area in France and
Germany are lower, reported to be 25% and 22% respectively. In addition, the UK
allocates the most money on Housing, at 37%, ahead of Germany (33%) and
France (31%). A rough similarity can be witnessed in the proportions of
expenditure on housing in Turkey and Spain, which are 20% and 18% in that order
Further investigation into the table reveals that Germany spending on clothing is
the highest, at 15%, double that of France and Spain and is approximately 3%
higher than the figures of The UK and Turkey.  Similarly, the German channels
19% of their earning every month into recreational activities. This figure is
followed by Spain (15%) and France (13%). Finally, the percentages of allocation
on entertainment in The UK and Turkey share comparable figures, reported to be
around 11%.
The graph indicates the proportion of national investment in traffic infrastructure in Italia, Portugal, UK, USA from
1990 to 2005.

Overall, there was a decrease in the proportion of government investment in roads and transport in Italia, Portugal
and the UK, while the opposite was true for that of America. In addition, The UK always had the lowest figures over
the period shown.

The proportion of Italian state expenditure started at 23%, after which it experienced a decline to exactly 20% in
1995, before ending the period at 19%. A similar pattern, but to a greater extent, can be seen in the figures for
Portugal , which descended from 27% in 1990 to precisely 20% over a period of 15 years.

10% of the government budget of the UK was invested in roads and transport in 1990, with a subsequent rise to
approximately 13% in 2000 and a final decline to 8%. Conversely, the figures for The USA were at north of 10% in
1990, followed by a growth by 4% at the end of the period.