Writing Task 2 - Please make the corrections where needed, thank you :)
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 9:18 am
Safety standards are important when building people's homes. Who should be responsible for enforcing strict building codes – the government or the people who build the homes?
Nowadays, safety is playing an important role in our lives. It is argued that there should be a safety standard which will help people to live without worries, especially on construction sites. While one side tends to believe that the government should be responsible for strict building codes, others say that people who are building homes should set their own rules. I personally think that the government should take that responsibility and make official standards for building security.
First of all, governments have the power to declare safety standards which people will have stick to unless they want to be punished. An example could be an official building code, with every aspect of the building. It has to be written by experts and therefore every role on a construction site should be involved. This kind of decision may relieve people who are building homes because of the lack of worry that something might happen to workers.
However, there are some constructors which tend not to listen to the rules. This is a situation where the government should react. For instance, they could set officers who could be responsible for checking construction sites and punish those who do not respect the rules. By doing that, they will increase safety, decrease the number of injuries at work and also improve employment through the country.
To sum up, in modern times we are living, it is extremely important to set basic rules for everything that people do. In many cases, the government is responsible for people’s lives. It is also their role is to set strict building codes and eventually punish those who do not follow the rules.
World history suggests that violence and conflict were more evident under male leadership than under female leadership. So, for peace to prevail, female leadership can be considered as a better option than male leadership. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
From the beginning of human existence, there were many wars, which brought up a lot of violence, crime and conflicts between people. Further, these wars were organised and controlled mostly by male leaders, while female leaders usually found different ways to solve problems. It is agreed that women are considerably better at handling conflicts and violence and it will be proven through this essay by explaining women's diverse paths of dealing with problems.
Firstly, main reasons for women's superiority in low - violence rate are well-developed ability to handle stress and the competence to find different ways when solving a problem. There are many various types of research, which proves that it is in women's nature to be more caring and less violent, for example. The result of this leads to fewer problems which are way a woman should be considered as a better option.
Furthermore, the biggest wars that happened in the history of the human race were led by men. Adolf Hitler, who held the worst Nazi camps in all Europe, is responsible for killing a numerous number of Jews during the second World War. He is just an example of many dictators back then. As opposite to them, the world has never experienced such a tragedy while the woman was a state leader.
All in all, there are several reasons why there is a lot less violence, deaths and conflicts while the woman is having control and why they are a preferable option when for leadership. Their caring nature and ability to vary when dealing with problems tend to end up as a success. You can not say that giving leadership to a woman will end up brightly every time, but I rather prefer to give them authority than to men.
Nowadays, safety is playing an important role in our lives. It is argued that there should be a safety standard which will help people to live without worries, especially on construction sites. While one side tends to believe that the government should be responsible for strict building codes, others say that people who are building homes should set their own rules. I personally think that the government should take that responsibility and make official standards for building security.
First of all, governments have the power to declare safety standards which people will have stick to unless they want to be punished. An example could be an official building code, with every aspect of the building. It has to be written by experts and therefore every role on a construction site should be involved. This kind of decision may relieve people who are building homes because of the lack of worry that something might happen to workers.
However, there are some constructors which tend not to listen to the rules. This is a situation where the government should react. For instance, they could set officers who could be responsible for checking construction sites and punish those who do not respect the rules. By doing that, they will increase safety, decrease the number of injuries at work and also improve employment through the country.
To sum up, in modern times we are living, it is extremely important to set basic rules for everything that people do. In many cases, the government is responsible for people’s lives. It is also their role is to set strict building codes and eventually punish those who do not follow the rules.
World history suggests that violence and conflict were more evident under male leadership than under female leadership. So, for peace to prevail, female leadership can be considered as a better option than male leadership. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
From the beginning of human existence, there were many wars, which brought up a lot of violence, crime and conflicts between people. Further, these wars were organised and controlled mostly by male leaders, while female leaders usually found different ways to solve problems. It is agreed that women are considerably better at handling conflicts and violence and it will be proven through this essay by explaining women's diverse paths of dealing with problems.
Firstly, main reasons for women's superiority in low - violence rate are well-developed ability to handle stress and the competence to find different ways when solving a problem. There are many various types of research, which proves that it is in women's nature to be more caring and less violent, for example. The result of this leads to fewer problems which are way a woman should be considered as a better option.
Furthermore, the biggest wars that happened in the history of the human race were led by men. Adolf Hitler, who held the worst Nazi camps in all Europe, is responsible for killing a numerous number of Jews during the second World War. He is just an example of many dictators back then. As opposite to them, the world has never experienced such a tragedy while the woman was a state leader.
All in all, there are several reasons why there is a lot less violence, deaths and conflicts while the woman is having control and why they are a preferable option when for leadership. Their caring nature and ability to vary when dealing with problems tend to end up as a success. You can not say that giving leadership to a woman will end up brightly every time, but I rather prefer to give them authority than to men.