hello guys, this is my practice for IELTS test, which mainly about the analysis of data. Thanks^_^ The graph shows the increase in the ageing population in Japan, Sweden and USA. It indicates the percentage of elderly people in all three countries increase by almost 25% of the respective populations by 2040. In 1940 the proportion of aged 65 or more account for only 5% in Japan, approximately 7% in Sweden and 9% in the US. However, the figures for the western countries grew to about 15% in around 1990, the figure for Japan dropped to almost 2.5%, before rising to 5% again at the present time. In spite of previous fluctuations, the proportion of older people would probably continue to climb in the next two decades in the three countries. A more dramatic surge is predicted between 2030 and 2040 in Japan, by that time the proportion of elderly people in the three countries would be similar.

hi guys, this is my practice for itelts test, please help correct it. Thanks a lot. ^_^ Question: People now can perform some everyday tasks, such as shopping and banking as well as business transactions, without meeting other people face to face. What are the effects of this development on individuals and on society as a whole? It is a prevalent phenomenon that a considerable number of people prefer to do some business transactions like shopping and banking online instead of meeting people in reality. It is of great significance to learn about the reasons and effects imposed on individuals and society. From my perspective, there are two driving factors leading to such a trend. First and foremost, it is the development of technology that prompts transactions between online, which means that more and more persons tend to make bank transactions on the internet rather than in the bank. Furthermore, the emergence of e-commerce promotes people to purchase things online rather than in the shopping mall. For individuals, it is of great convenience for them to buy things or banking online, which actually save a great quantity of time. People do not have to wait a long line in the bank or go further places to go shopping, while they could deal with almost everything at home. Whereas, this trend also becomes a hindrance between people’s interactions. Given that people would rather satisfy their own needs online, the face to face interactions between are less than before as well. For society, the rise of online transactions improves efficiency of social operation, which is conducive to both government and citizens. Lacking of efficiency, a country would not be prosperous. However, the negative side is that traditional physical entities become a victim of the internet, which mainly because the majority of customers may transfer to online consuming. To conclude, I tend to believe that the rise of internet and e-commerce is the major contributing factor to such a trend. However, I personally think that the pros outweigh cons further, which means that the convenience and efficiency it brings is worthy.

hello, guys. this is a issue on whether governments should interfere with people's lifestyle. Question: Some people think it is the responsibility for government to ensure that people have healthy lifestyles. Others think people should have a free for their own lifestyles decisions. The issue whether government should hold responsibility for people’s healthy lifestyles has sparked off an intense debate. As far as I’m concerned, I personally believe that it is of paramount significant for government to make sure people live a healthy lifestyle. Some people hold that the government plays an important role in regulating citizens, so it should ensure that citizens live in a healthy condition. To begin with, it is widely accepted that that the government serves as the servants of people, which means it should take citizens’ life into consideration. As we all know, the first one is that the government should make sure people live healthily. Only in this way, people would have more energy to pursue their studies and careers. Furthermore, the cost of unhealthy lifestyle is enormous so that this kind of lifestyle may lead to a waste of national funding that should have originally been utilized in more important places. Whereas, others tend to believe that citizens should have free right to choose their own lifestyles. First and foremost, everyone has his or her free will, which means they could select what to do regardless of other people’s thoughts. People should have the right to choose what life they would like to live no matter whether it is good or not. Moreover, the definition of healthy lifestyle is not clear, which causes a difficulty for government in interfering with the lifestyle of people. To conclude, although people do have the free right to make their own lifestyle decisions, I’m personally inclined to support that government should take participate in regulating the lifestyle of people.

dears, it's me again. thank you all for your kind help. ^_^ Question: Many people argue that nowadays consumers buy lots of goods they don’t actually need because they are influenced by advertisements. To what extent do you agree or disagree? The issue whether the majority of people are influenced by different kinds of advertisements so as to purchase a number of commodities they do not need in fact has sparked off an intense debate in the current society. From my perspective, the impact of other factors such as peer effect and sales by merchandise outweighs the impact of advertisements. Indeed, it is widely known that advertisements play an important role in attracting people’s eyes and prompting the sales. Also, advertisements tend to exaggerate the quality and usefulness of goods tempting people to buy what they do not really require without hesitation. Whereas, the effects are limited since consumers gradually realize that most of the ads are deceptive. Instead, recent years have witnessed the rise of peer influence that people especially youngsters are easily influenced by peers. Given that peer pressure, teenagers tend to purchase something that others obsess as well regardless of whether it is useful for them. Then these things of no use may be discarded by people, which means a waste of money. In addition, sales of a variety companies may exert a significant impact on customers. When there are discounts on some commodities, people are easily immersed in shopping without any hesitation. That is mainly because that consumers are inclined to believe that it is worth buying these goods on sale due to their cheap price. To conclude, although advertisements have a certain influence on customers’ purchasing behavior. However, compared with advertisements, peer influence and sales effect are the major contributing factors to people buying a considerable number of goods they do not need.

buddies, this is my essay for ielts test, please give me a hand. thank you all guys. ^_^ Question: Air transport is increasingly used to export fruits and vegetables to countries where they cannot be grown or are out of season. Some people say this is a good thing while other people think it cannot be justified. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. The issue of whether exporting fruits and vegetables by airlines is beneficial has sparked off an intense debate. Some people hold that exporting food benefits people in either exporting countries or importing countries, while others claim that it poses a threat to the environment. I personally believe that people would benefit from it if only the fruits and vegetables are transmitted by airlines with environmental-friendly fuel. It is widely believed that exporting business has a positive impact on both exporting countries and importing countries. On the one hand, for exporting countries, it not only expands the farm food market but also increases the income of farmers and their own country. As we can/all see, recent years have witnessed a growing trend in sales of exporting food. On the other hand, for importing countries, it is undeniable that having a variety of food that is out of season is conducive to balancing maintaining a healthy and nutrient diet. Nevertheless, it is also a widespread awareness that excessive uses of air transport is are detrimental to environment especially the air condition/have its inherent disadvantages. To begin with, excessive emitting of carbon dioxide released by airplane may lead to global warming, an extremely serious problem harassing the world. What is more, the detrimental gases released from aircraft such as sulfur dioxide also pose a threat to human. As far as I am concerned, it is of paramount significance/top priority for governments and scientists to seek renewable resources to replace fuels that is are hazardous to the earth. Only in this way, people can constantly benefit from exporting fruits and vegetables by means of aircraft.

hi, dear friends, this is my essay for ielts, maybe a litter longer, please be patient!^_^ Question: Giving detailed descriptions of crime by newspaper and television, someone says it could make bad consequence; this kind of media should be restricted. To what extent do you agree or disagree. The issue of whether mass media should give detailed descriptions about crime has sparked off an intense debate. From my perspective, it exerts a positive impact on both individuals and societies. It is undeniable/out of question that exposing details about crime to the public may lead to detrimental consequences. For example, criminals may tend to imitate the detailed behaviors disclosed in the newspaper or television when seeing the news. However, I personally incline to claim that the cons are frequently overshadowed by the pros. To begin with, it is widely known that the disclosure of a series of crimes on mass media plays an essential role in threatening the criminals. Given that criminals may extremely be afraid of being arrested once committing a crime, the crime rate tends to decline. As we can see, recent years have witnessed the decrease of the crime rate. Therefore, it is conducive to reducing the number of people who attempt to commit a crime. In addition, it is of paramount significance for people to learn more about a variety of crimes so as to increase the awareness of safety. Compared with the sanctions of criminals, improving the awareness of safety should be given a higher priority, which means citizens may be protected against infringement only in this way. Furthermore, people incline to inform a deep understanding of different kinds of crimes by getting news from newspapers, television or the internet so that they could deal with it according to different situations. To conclude, although detailed disclosure of social crimes, to some extent, is hazardous to both societies and individuals, I personally believe that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

dear friends, this is an exercise for ielts test, thank you for you kind help! Question: Some people think that schools should select students according to their academic abilities while others believe that it is better to have students with different abilities study together. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. The issue of whether academic abilities should be regarded as the sole criterion in terms of selecting students has sparked off an intense debate. Some people hold that academic abilities should be served as the only standard, while others claim that it should be combined with other capabilities as a consideration. I personally advocates the lateral idea. On the one hand, advocates of the idea point out that it is of paramount significance for universities to give a higher priority to academic abilities. That is mainly because absorbing theoretical knowledge is the first step to become proficient in a variety of domains, which means application could be achieved only after systematic study of theoretical knowledge. What is more, equipping with academic abilities is conducive to make more achievements in one’s career. One person without enough academic capabilities and knowledge is less likely to competent the job and make great achievements. On the other hand, opponents of the idea incline to believe that the selecting standards should include not only academic abilities but also a series of other abilities or characteristics such as perseverance and responsibility. First and foremost, Given that universities are considered as a platform to foster students’ different kinds of skills in an attempt to make them suit in the society better, they had better take comprehensive skills into consideration when selecting appropriate students. In addition, it is widely known that even though one person possesses academic knowledge, it does not mean that he or she could has the job well done. By contrast, one person equipped with both academic abilities and a wide range of other abilities may more likely to succeed in the career. To conclusion, I concede that although academic abilities are of great importance for universities to choose students, they should not be considered as the only criterion. Instead, they should focus more on those students with a variety of talents.

Hey there, this my practice for the ielts test! Plz help me! Thank u so much! Many people arts and music do not improve the quality of life, the government should spend money on other things rather than the arts such as music and painting, to what extent do you agree or disagree? The issue of whether it is necessary for government to invest money in arts and music arouses drastic debate. Someone point out that it is meaningless to put money on arts and music, while others claim that it is worth doing that. From my perspective, the government should give high priority to basic infrastructures or social systems, such as education and medical care programs instead of subsidizing the arts. To begin with, arts and music are not determinants of the quality of life, and they just play a role in regulating emotions of people. Furthermore, compared with basic social systems, they contribute less to societies and may not reduce the burden of people’s life actually. Therefore, it may be not worth spending too much money on arts and music. Moreover, it is much more urgent for government to commit money to some fundamental social systems like education or public health. As a matter of fact, it could bring a considerable number of benefits to citizens, which includes a variety of resources of good quality and decreased expenditure. Consequently, citizens can become competent enough to maintain their daily life either in schooling or healthy. Hence, I personally believe that it is of more significance for government to subsidize basic social systems rather than arts and music. Indeed, arts and music, to some extent, are also conducive to improve the quality of people’s life and foster a positive attitude to life. However, the impacts might be limited since the most fundamental requirements for citizens are still factual stuff including education, health and so forth. In conclusion, I incline to believe that although arts and music play an important role in society, the investment of basic social systems take higher priorities.

Hey there, this my practice for the ielts test! Plz help me! Thank u so much! In many countries, traditional foods are being replaced by international fast foods. this is having a negative effect on both families and societies. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Recent years have witnessed a major trend in diet habits that traditional foods are substituted by international fast foods in many areas. Although fast foods indeed have some benefits, I personally believe that they bring more adverse impacts to citizens' life.   Indeed, it is widely accepted that the appearance of fast foods lead to great convenience to us, which means it is conducive to save time especially in current fast-paced society. Furthermore, they also have an unresisting attraction for children. Nevertheless, compared with traditional foods, fast foods exert much more adverse impacts on families and societies.   For families, it is apparent that having fast foods for a long period is detrimental. A wide range of examples manifest that high calories in fast foods are highly related to chronic diseases such as high blood pressure, obesity and so forth. Furthermore, deficiency of nutrition in fast foods also post a threat to families. Therefore, the negative influence imposed on individuals and families should not be ignored.   In addition, it turns out that fast foods is a hinderance to the publicity of traditional foods' cultures, which means people may put less focus on traditional cultures. Once people get accustomed to have fast foods, families and societies may incline to turn a blind eye to traditional foods' cultures so that they are unable to be inherited by us.   To sum up, although fast foods have some benefits to some extent, they are still hazardous to citizens' health. Given that, it is of great significance for societies and families to be aware of the negative effects and properly change their diet structure .