More and more people are becoming overweight.

Some people suggest that

increasing the price of fattening food is a solution.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is no denying that the trend of overweight is prevalent around and actually

haunting the public. Although some people think that the high price of fattening
food can only solve the problem of this trend, I totally disagree this viewpoint.

On the one hand, admittedly, raising the price of food, can harness people's
purchase or eating desire to some degree. Considering relatively higher costs for
such kind of unhealthy food, such as burgers, chicken nuggets and cakes, residents
rationally may reduce consumption, leading to less fatty foodlovers and accordingly
less overweight population in the long run. However, this solution is over idealized
and theoretical since it is impossible to stop people who are crazy in pursuing for
fattening food, due to lack of relevant knowledge. Under this circumstance, the
policy of high price cannot work and will be failed.

On the other hand, there are some more effective solutions to tackle the issue of
overweight. For one thing, through non-commercial advertising on media, the public
can understand the side effect of overweight such as hypertension or heart disease
and be motivated to exercise on a regular basis, if they still stay in sedentary lives,
like indoorsy guy playing video game or watching TV all day, without regular exercise
and eating healthy diet, this will not only undermines their physical body but also
erodes mental health condition. For another, governments build sports facilities such
as gym, baseball court, and swimming pool in communities. In this way, going to
sports facilities is accessible or convenient, residents are more willing to go
downstairs and participate sports activities For example, my cities is located at
tropical area, so it is scorch hot here. Many residents in my community will stop by
swimming pool to swim before going back home.

In conclusion, I think the public propaganda and sport facilities are more proactive
solution to cope with overweight
Some people believe that university education should focus on the skills of

employment for the future. Others think it should focus on academic study only.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

It is not uncommon that university education is more and more pervasive around
the world .However, people have different views about whether university should
furnish skills of employment or academic study. In my opinion, I totally agree with
the former.

On the one hand, the main benefits of focusing on academic study is that higher
education expands students’ academic knowledge scope, which helps them become
a well-rounded person and a useful member contributing to society. Students learn a
wide range of subjects and lessons from previous events in school, so they have
enough abilities to judge right or wrong and optimize current social institutions to
better society. For example, Nowadays, the gender equality is ingrained in most
young people’s minds, so they are inclined to share housework and workload equally
between different genders ,no matter where in home or at work. As a result, this can
reduce tensions and conflicts, which makes society more peaceful and harmonious.

However, a certain amount of job-oriented training should also be available in

today's universities where academic pursuit sometimes have been overemphasized
and students' academic knowledge, since working skills can directly benefit students,
especially for material level rather than spiritual or moral level, in the foreseeable
future. For many young graduates, they need a fast start into the job market. If their
skills such as programming or accounting are industry needs, they can successfully
find jobs with well- paid salaries. By contrast, if people majoring in literature or art do
not have extra practical skills, they even get the jobs easily substituted. Based on
compelling events, providing practical subjects is crucial for university.

In conclusion, I think that higher education shoulders a great deal of responsibilities,

which would certainly include employment achievement for their students
Some people think that history should be a compulsory subject in
schools, while others believe that history has little or nothing to tell
students. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion
It is true that history influences people in every aspect. People have different views
about whether history should be a compulsory subject, or history is useless for
students. I totally agree the former

One the hand, history should be a mandatory subject in that it can have a variety
of benefits for students .For one thing, studying history can also deepen their
understanding of the past of their country. History will provide a wide range of
information such as economy, politics and society, so students can use different
angles to perceive previous events happening in their country. For example, if
students research Taiwan history comprehensively, they will know Taiwan’s
sovereignty doesn’t belong to china. As a result, they build a sense of responsibility
to their country and develop a strong sense of cultural identity and belonging. For
another, by judging historical events in group assignments, students will brainstorm
their opinions, developing their analytical and critical -thinking skills because they
need to analyze a wide range of factors contributing to this event.

On the other hand, history can teach students little or nothing. History is one of
subjects Studying previous events, while students should focus on the present and
the future. For example, they should concentrate on subjects such as science and
information technology, which can help them to gain a better understanding of
modern technology and increase their competitiveness in the job market further.
However, this opinion is nearsighted. History is helpful for students throughout their
whole lives since history can change their values and attitude toward lives in the long
term.

In conclusion, I believe that history can help students to develop analytical skills,
critical -thinking skills and a strong sense of cultural identity and belonging.
Therefore, history should be a compulsory subject in schools.
In many countries, people wear more western-style clothes (suits and jeans)
than their traditional clothes.

Why is this happening? Is it a positive or negative development?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your
own knowledge or experience.

It is not uncommon that Individuals in many nations prefer clothing derived from
western countries instead of dressing their traditional. There are several reasons for
this trends followed by my firm opinion that it is an adverse development.

There are mainly two factors behind people’s increased predisposition for wearing
western- style attire rather than their traditional garments. For one thing ,most
people think western culture is superior since, nowadays, western countries ,such as
America, some filed like fashion and movies and also have higher living standards so
people will follow their clothing culture blindly. For another, western wear is
generally more convenient regarding people’s everyday activities. Western-style
clothes are known as easy to wear, wash and keep, which is suitable for people in the
busy life. For example, compared to traditional clothing, sport wears are made of
artificial fiber which is more reliable and durable than natural material like cotton
and leather. Another example is that texture of jeans is flexible and wear-resistant, so
it is feasible for construction worker or miner to go up and down the ladder
frequently.

However, I strongly believe these grave consequences will eventually be entailed. the
passing down of local cultures can be detrimentally impacted in the long run. If fewer
people wear their clothes, the specific cultures embedded in the costumes will be
overlooked. A good example is that many young people in Taiwan do not understand
the meanings of the cheongsam and what this clothing truly represents. Secondly,
the traditional clothing industry may disappoint. Factories manufacturing traditional
clothes cannot sell out their products and lose many, which probably rarely have
chance pass traditional clothes to next generation and promote this kind of culture,
from a vicious cycle.
.
In conclusion, I completely agree this situation will result in negative outcomes,
including stopping indigenous cultures from being passed down to future
generations and causing damage to the local traditional clothing industry.
Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local
people. Why is this the case and what can be done to attract more local people to
visit these places?

It is no denying that nowadays, museums and historical sites gain more popularity
from tourists instead of local people. There are some causes for this tends and
several suggesting solutions to tackling this problem

There are many reasons why museums and historical places for local people are not
as popular as for tourists. For one thing, local people find paying a visiting these
places dull and boring since they are familiar with these places, which makes them
less willing to visit there again. By contrast, nowadays, local people prefer to watch
trip videos online , because these films are always updated and people are curious
about scenes which they have never experienced. For another, most museums and
historical places’ tickets are steep in that governments outsource these places to
private companies to manage, due to limited budgets, so these places loss their
original functions and their attraction. A good example is that most museums or
historical sites enlarge their business space such as restaurants, accommodations or
gift shops at a big scale to get more revenue and reduce their exhibition pace. As a
result, this leads to losing their educational purpose to some degree.

To encourage local residents to attend historical relics and museums, several

measures can be taken / promoted /prompted. First, authorities can impose more
taxes on other entertainments, especially these activities at night, such as karaoke or
night clubs and subsidize museums and historical sites to let local people visit these
places for free. These policies can encourage people to go outdoors and have healthy
lifestyles. Secondly, museums and historical sites can ally with other stores such as
department store, hotel and tea shop to advertise their exhibition in order to get
more attentions from the public.

In conclusion, governments need to put efforts to manage museums and historical

sites achieve educational purpose and increasing people’s literacy