Some people think the spread of multinational companies and globalization produce positive outcomes for everyone

Some people say that too much time and resources are spent on the protection of wild animals and birds.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer
Some people argue that protecting wild animals and birds is a waste of time and money. I completely disagree with this point of view.
Many current practices involving the use of animals illustrate that governments have not invested enough time in the issue of animal welfare. For example, lawmakers have banned the use of wild and exotic animals for entertainment purposes, yet wild animals are still kept in captivity for circuses. This inconsistency between law-making and law enforcement suggests that the issue is not being taken seriously enough by those in power. Furthermore, it seems that an educational approach is unlikely to change people’s awareness about the issue. For many years, people have underestimated the role of wild animals, and many today still hold a belief that wild animal products have exceptional powers. To re-educate such people requires patience and consistency.
In addition to this, resources spent on wildlife protection are still limited. Many authorities believe that wild animal and bird conservation is only of minor importance, and human welfare is far more of a priority. This is why governments are not willing to allocate large amounts of funds and resources to the conservation of wild animals, which makes it difficult for organisations that are actually trying to make a difference. For instance, in Vietnam, we do not see any long-lasting bird conservation campaigns due to a lack of funding from the government, and it is non-governmental organizations that currently raise the funds to take care of existing wild birds.
In conclusion, while there is some time and resources spent on wild animal and bird protection, I believe that far more resources are needed to achieve that ultimate goal.

Most people these days prefer getting news online to reading newspapers or watching TV. Do you think it is a positive development?
Today many men and women are having a preference for reading news on the internet instead of traditional newspapers and television. This essay will argue that this is a positive development because it alleviates paper consumption and facilitates fast and convenient news for people.
Going online to read news will reduce the amount of paper used. This is mainly because newspapers are manufactured by this type of material, yet documents for broadcasting news on TV. Therefore, the transition of reading news to online platforms will result in the demand of newspapers declining, hence the total amount of paper consumed every day will be considerably decreased. For example, Australia recently reported that every year 30% of total trees are cut down for producing newspapers and paper-related products.
Online newspapers can trigger the emergence of quick and easy news for people. The primary reason for many people choosing news on the internet to read is that those news are shorter and clearer in order to be kept informed rapidly. Taking my personal experience as an example, I follow news on the internet because I don’t want to miss any latest political statement from the government. So because of this predicament, traditional news on newspapers and TV will be forced to adapt, creating shorter and more clarity news to drive more people into those platforms, putting a kibosh on long and exaggerated news and headlines in society.
In conclusion, reading news through smartphones and computers is conducive to future development because it minimises the amount of paper consumption and fosters the transparency of news for people.