Search the Community

The arguments made to prove Corporateville is a superior place to live compared to Middlesburg are flawed and void of substantial proof. When a company headquarters changes location, there are different factors considered than when an individual or a family makes the same move. The truth that there has been a recent surge in the number of homeowners in Corporateville does not prove that it is a superior place to live compared to Middlesburg. There can be many reasons for this surge outside of the fact that SuperCorp recently moved its headquarters to Corporateville. There is the possibility that a myriad of other companies have also moved to Corporateville, not only SuperCorp. Also, just becuase a company moves headquarters does not mean the employees must move with the company. Some employees may have a lease that they cannot afford to break, or have wonderful neighbors they do not want to leave. Corporatesville may have recently installed a large amusement park that people want to live near. The assumtion that employees must move where their job headquarters is located cannot be justified. The survey data showing that SuperCorp employees prefer to live in an area that is not urban means nothing with respect to the recent surge in the number of homeworners in Corporateville. Corporateville cannot be the only non-urban city in a commutable distance from SuperCorps headquarters. In addition, the survey data may not even be an accurate representation of all the employees at SuperCorps. The survey may have targeted people with families or people within a certain age or race demographic. There is no proof that the survey was unbiased and/or all inclusive of every employee at SuperCorps and therefore, cannot be an accurate representation of the company. While it is understandable for a company to make a move to a new town due to tax cuts and a safer environment, there are different factors to be considered when singles, couples, and families make the same transition. For example, not every employee is in a finacially stable enough situation to be able to move with the company. In addition to financial stability, other employees may have other commitments to Middlesburg such as a spouses current job or the school their child attends. Moving from one town to the next requires more thought and reasoning besides a tax cut. The arguements in favor of Corporateville as a superior place to spend life and time have no true meaning. There are many more factors to consider when an individual, and especially a family, makes a move from one town to another. These factors were not considered and therefore, the argument was weak and couldn't provide all the proof needed to make the claim that Corporateville is a better place to live.

HELLO, I want my TOEFL speaking recordings to get graded?..which forum should i go to ?

Hi everyone, I recently discovered this forum and I was so puzzled how I went through most of my preparation without it... I have started to practise essays a month before my exam, please find below on I wrote recently. I am looking for another persons opinion on grading my essay: Topic: Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The statement that governments should limit the scientific research and development by imposing restrictions is a widely discussed and controversial topic with the advent of technology in the 20 century. On one hand limiting research in specific areas can prove to decrease the amount of scientific innovations. Considering the intricate and complex harmony in which science is developed this can affect seemingly adjacent areas. However, limitations can also be beneficial as technological breakthroughs can seldom provide more problems to humanity. Some of the most appreciated technologies might have not been discovered if certain limits were placed on scientific research and innovation. Nevertheless, it is more beneficial to science and humanity that certain limits are imposed. Innovation in science can take many forms - it can come from a discovery of a new mathematical formulation all the way to the development of a water channel to ease transport. The reason for this is that it is a very intricate network of discrete events each contributing to the discovery of another. These unforgeable events can sometimes lead to major scientific innovations in different fields of research and industries. The research in space exploration has always been controversial due to the high risk for the loss of human life or the exorbitant costs associated with construction and atmospheric launch. However, if limitations were imposed on the mid 20 century space exploration then all the innovations and discoveries would not have taken place. The result would be that the new technology would have never entered the commercial aircraft market and the most common method of transport associated with today's age, the aircraft, would not have been able to transform the world towards the greater good. On the other hand, considering that if science and innovation are left unchecked it might cause a greater problem. The speed with which technology is progressing means that in the very near future with the improvements in 3D printing technology it will be possible to synthesise proteins. It is feared by governments that if this was to become a widely accessible technology then everyone would be able to create viruses and diseases with the clicks of a few buttons. Furthermore, with the creation of the nuclear technology in the mid 20 century a new type of weapon with execrable disastrous power was made possible. The notorious power of the nuclear bomb is the most famous example of a technology developed to better the life of people that can be used in a completely opposite and destructive way. Therefore, numerous governmental control bodies exist that monitor how nuclear and biological technologies are developed and imposes limits where it considers it appropriate. It can be seen that even though this is making research more difficult it is still increasing exponentially. Proving that if the restrictions are reasonable than dangerous exploitation of technology can be avoided and the scientific progress can avoid being halted. In conclusion, it can be seen that imposing limitations of scientific research and development would not create problems if it is done with reason. It is therefore considered reasonable that a governmental body with world experts in charge can determine the most optimal way that innovations of a certain technology are limited to provide the best scientific progress and avoid dangerous circumstanced to humanity.

Group #1: Analysis of Issue The desire of corporations to maximize profits creates conflict with the general welfare of the nation at large Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading. ANSWER In this globalized world,It is a fact that business can survive only when it grows bigger and bigger ,else it will be overtaken by a rival.So automatically it will have conflicts with other companies.The competition pressures the company to resort to ulterior motives in order to increase the profits and thus beat the rival.The general public bear the brunt of the policies as the increased profits result from extra burden on the general public.Hence the welfare of the public takes a back seat and profit becomes the main motive. A Pharmaceutical company sold a health additive in the brand name of horlicks.Once it has a very good customer base and got a good following .The company reduced the quantity sold and increased the prices.this caused great hardships for the customer.Hoarding (Holding up supply until renumerative prices are offered)is another way of getting undue profits.Hoarding of onion caused so many problems ! for the people in India that a whole government was toppled for that single reason.This shows the extent to which large corporations are willing to lower their integrity in order to earn profits These type of marketing strategies are commonly used for increasing profits.The price rise is not due to inflation or any other external factor,the sole purpose being the greed for increasing profits and getting undue benefits from the sale of their products .This ultimately affects the general public as they have to pay more for no other reason than to satiate the greed of the corporations.This creates a direct conflict with the nation's interest at large. Looking at the methods employed by one corporations,the other corporation has to follow suit in order to stay in the competition on a long term basis.This is like a chain reaction where in the prices of a whole range of goods and services are likely to change because of a change in prices of one of the commodities.This may also lead to an in flation where people have to spend more for lesser goods.The basic design of a globalized business is in such a way that there has to be competition to ensure success.This competition is often unhealthy and the people are affected due to the schemes of the companies to increase profits and stay healthy in the race to be bigger and more profitable. Thus it can be clearly seen that the greed for maximizing profits is in direct conflict with the nations's interest

I am taking the GRE in a week and just found out about this website. I would really appreciate it if someone could grade my issue essay. Thank you very much in advance! ************************************************************************** Issue Task : A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. Write a response in which you explain the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. In order to set a fair and uniform educational system in a state, a nation should reqire all of its students to study the same national curriculum. However, this curriculum does not necessarily have to be standardized up till the last years of high school and should allow for adjustments and enhancements when necessary. Setting standard national curriculum would ensure that there is less of a gap in the quality or level of academia given to students at public and private schools. Leaving the curriculum in the hands of each school would make discrepancies much higher and would create a social imbalance in the education of children from affluent families who can afford high level private instituations and less financially privileged children who attend less expensive schools. Furthermore, it makes it easier to compare student performance, IQs, and exam grades if all have been following the same curriculum. Looking even further into the future, a single curriculum would make college accpetance processes easier and more fair, as all applicants are compared based on the same eduacational background, discounting the inevitable difference in teacher qualification, school environment, and equipment. However, a single curriculum also has its downside. Setting the curriculum "in stone" risks creating an uber rigid system which does not allow for freedom of expression, experimentation, and innovation on behalf of both the teachers and the students. This in turn limits the potential to learn from current events and adapt to classroom situations or needed adjustments based on unplanned or unexpected events throughout the year. Moreover, a curriculum set by the nation, which usually implies the government, also riks having a system which is molded by a hidden political agenda, which again, may limit free thinking, analytical skills, and cognitive abilities. In order to have an effective educational system, it should be mandated that a national curriculum be followed as a guide and simultaneously allow for flexibility in assigning additional projects, assignments, or topics of discussion. Furthermore, a uniform curriculum should not necessarily be followed up until the students enter college. It may be more sensible to have a national curriculum from elementary to middle school, but have a less rigid academic system in high school once the students have a reached an age which allows for and requires more open teaching methods and autonomous research. Not only should the curriculum be more flexible, but it should also be drafted and written in cooperation between governmental entities, representatives from private schools and public schools, professionals with practical experience, and ideally even with the input of the students themselves. Setting a national curriculum to be followed by all schools in a certain country has its pros and cons. While it ensures fair and equal education to students of all socioeconomic levels, it also may be too rigid and prevent students from reaching their full creative potential. Finding a balance between a well-rounded curriculum which leaves room for tweaking creates a practical and effective academic system that benefits all of the students, teachers, and nation.