Some people say it is more important to plant trees in the open spaces in towns and cities than to build more housing. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some countries invest in specialized sports facilities for top athletes but not for the average person. Is this a positive or a negative development?
In recent times, certain nations fund physical exercise equipment for top athletes rather than the average individual. Providing finance for this purpose is essential for a successful play outcome. In my opinion, I believe that this is a good development.
To begin with, success in competitions is the major benefit derived from putting in money for sports resources for the high-rank players.This is because the provision of these amenities makes physical training and practice optimally .Thus, this provides them with the skill to conquer any opponent on the field.For example,a research study showed that the victory of the Sudan players in the Olympic games in 2002 is largely due to the training they had on the ultra-modern football pitch built by their president. As a result of this,they had an excellent performance.
On the other hand, a reduction in the rate of participation in physical activity by the public is one of the bad effects of this trend. This is because the masses lose interest to participate in any play recreation since the government do not consider them while financing the amenities for the top athletes.For instance, the news in the past few days reports that 70% of people do not engage in sports due to the non-availability of playing equipment. Due to this, they stop partaking in any sports activity.
In my opinion, I believe that this is a good trend because it improves the mental health of the masses .This is because funding for sports amenities increases the standard of sports.Hence, physical recreation of adequate standards reduces stress and anxiety.To illustrate,the goals scored by a national player in the 2002 Olympic games made the public happy for a long period. Thus, investing in sports facilities for high-rated athletes is beneficial and should be encouraged.
To conclude,although the decreased level of physical exercise among the people is common following investment in physical recreation centres, I still believe that it is a positive impact because it is essential for excellence in competitions and also for a good mood.
Sports are becoming paramount for the overall growth of a nation and to earn a world-famous tag, that is the reason the legal authorities of many countries are investing in their sportsmen. I personally believe that this investment has many positive aforementioned impacts on the universe.
First and foremost, if the ministry announced to spend a fixed amount of money on special sports for the excellent players, it will definitely encourage the common man to participate and excel in any particular game. Hence, the players will stay away from drugs which leads to good mental and physical health as well. For example, the world-famous gymnasium player Ron quit smoking as he was dedicated to earning a gold medal for his country.,
Moreover, if the government announces to spend more money on top athletes, then the players will feel more special and close to authorised organisations which can motivate them and, hence, their performance can significantly improve. Therefore, the government should promote their plans to average people which can force them to be on the top list. As a result, everyone will feel special and do more hard work to keep his country's name on the world's top players list.
On the other side, many people may get discouraged and this issue can become controversial as everyone is paying taxes and people can arise questions about not investing their money in some players.
In conclusion, investing in specific sports for excellent players will result to improve their performance as well as motivate all other lower-level players to become world-famous and earn names and fame.

Some people think that children who spend a lot of time reading children's story books are wasting their time which could be better used doing other more useful activities. To what extent do you agree?
Reading a lot of story books by children's leisure activity is debatable. Some people claim that it is a waste of time instead children can do other useful activities. I completely disagree with this statement. Reading story books improve the language skills in children and other useful activities like playing outdoor games, drawing and painting might not be of any help to a child who is not interested in these activities.
Firstly, reading a story book at an early age will improve a child's learning ability. In addition, the language skills will develop for instance, children can develop good vocabulary and grammar. Moreover, the cognitive ability of these tender brains will develop when they read more story books. For example, Sherlock Holmes the great detective writer was a voracious reader during his childhood days. Therefore, reading story books is not a waste of time instead it will help the children to develop their language skills.
Secondly, other useful activities like playing games outside, drawing or painting might not suit everyone. Because some children who are physically challenged cannot play outside. Similarly, not all children are interested in art, instead they may prefer to study. To cite an example, I was never interested in drawing or painting during my childhood days, despite my parents insisted that it was a good activity. Although, some free time activities are universally accepted as good, still reading story books is not a bad choice. In fact, it has more positive effects on the overall personality development of a child.
In conclusion, even though free time activities like drawing and painting are useful, some children might not be interested. However, spending time by reading story books will benefit children to enhance their language skills. As a result, it is not a waste of time instead every child must be encouraged to read books.

In today's world, fewer youngsters prefer reading books more than the internet. However, reading children's storybooks are considered losing time in an inappropriate way by some people, they believe that there are more practical activities. Personally, I completely disagree with their consideration.

On the one hand, the reason to support my opinion is that, generally, reading books itself gives common education to the young generation. As for children's tales, I believe that the adapted books provide some benefits to children as well. For instance, my seven-year-old son and I often read books and he asks particular questions from time to time. Basically, the questions are around all common things we meet while reading: people, places, various things and so on. Thus, I believe that stories also participate in the mental development of our children.
On the other hand, I suppose it makes a perfect base for further acceptance of more important information, that will be used by them to do more useful activities. That is why tales and stories are taught in the elementary grade. Children are used to receiving information through them.
In conclusion, I suppose the story reading will be always the platform for youngsters to cognition of the world and they will use it properly for their further growth. Some youngsters enjoy reading more than playing football and various playground activities. Furthermore, it is a matter of choice whether the child prefers reading more than any other activity and will it be profitable for them or not.


In many cities, planners tend to arrange shops, schools, offices and homes in specific areas and separate them from each other. Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
With the development of urbanization, organizers prefer to allocate entertainment facilities, working spaces, schools and residences to different regions. This essay will agree with the advantages far more than the disadvantages of using well-established management and remedy for the climate crisis from this.
Firstly, separating the land planning by functions provides efficient management of urbanization. The local authority can set up well-established plans to meet what kinds of requests the specific community demands. For example, pupils and city-dwellers prefer to study and live in quieter and cleaner places. If planners organize to differentiate the working area from educational and living regions, we could retain the high quality of studying and living environment without the noise and air pollution from factories and businesses. Thus, the distinct area separations in a city have a positive outcome.
Although some opponents argue that separated urban plans render environmental damage coming from commuters, there are alternative ways to amend this problem. Indeed, if every commuter drives their private vehicles to their office and schools, it would undoubtedly be detrimental to our planet. However, the government can develop more comprehensive infrastructure, such as a cycling path and a dedicated carriageway for electric buses, to lessen these issues. The Taiwanese officers, for instance, reorganize the roads for bicycles and provide vouchers for workers who work in the Hsinchu Science Park to encourage them to make use of public transport rather than drive their cars during peak hours.
In conclusion, although separate urban plans might ruin our environment, I believe that the downside is outweighed by the upsides of utilizing well-organized approaches.

More and more municipal governments designed their cities according to various purposes in designated blocks. I believe the drawbacks of this phenomenon outweigh the merits.

First and foremost, the separation of facilities could reduce the disturbance of noise to each other. Pupils, as a salient example, are prone to be distracted and the hustle and bustle of shops around schools may be an enormous temptation for them to concentrate on study. Similarly, putting business districts apart from school zones could lessen the possibility of meeting strangers and wrongdoers for youngsters. Any unfamiliar people drafting around, for example, will be easily recognised and raise safety attentions for the young. In addition, centralised infrastructure constructions and maintenance for different functions save costs for public service. High street areas, for instance, require an intense power supply and garbage cleaning more than school zones.
On the other hand, city dwellers are spending a tremendous amount of time and cost on commuting. Parents, especially, have to send their descendants to school then to work in the morning in congested traffic. Secondly, Inhabited regions with shops, schools, parks and business offices are better suitable for living. For instance, it creates a safer street with people around as a community network for kids. Furthermore, empty areas, such as school and office zone at night, forge a space for criminal activities.
In conclusion, the downside of extreme separation of city functions by area has long term repercussions on residents and a well-mixed city plan based on communities should be more delightful for society as a whole.