leaders should be young or old? (The leaders or directors of organizations are often older people. But some people think that young people can also be leaders. To that extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?) It seems that from ancient times to the present, of the phenomenon that seniors are usually be the chiefs or commander of administration is common. I partly agree with this idea. Time gives seniors more practical experience accumulation and wisdom that can be learnt no other way. They are acquainted with devastating and urgent situations and events, helping to deal with them more appropriately, which is thought to be at the core of leadership and organizing. Normally, old people are high in seniority so that they are capable of taking responsibility for everything and every numbers. As a result they are considered to be reliable and trustworthy, and giving others mental security. On the other hand, youth is treasure, after all, Youngsters are way more energetic, active and creative that seniors, for they can work extra hours, always hold the passion and are more likely to come up with innovative initiatives, which increase working efficiency a lot. Being leaders is also a fast and effective way to help them learn, improve and thoughen themselves, because they have to plan ahead and be in charge of everything. And not often but there really is some young people with outstanding abilities can work even better than seniors. They shouldn’t be stifled. In conclusion, to a great extent, it is truly reasonable to let the old organize and command. Yet they should also discover and cultivate youngsters of excellent abilities by allowing them to be members of the leading group.