IELTS Writing Samples

Response: In recent years, an increasing number of individuals have been passionate about uncovering the history of their accommodations. This trend seems to stem from several factors, and there are some ways that can assist keen people to acquire enough information, which will be discussed in this essay. One of the primary reasons contributing to this trend is because humans are typically and naturally curious and enjoy exploring new things and finding out new information. Additionally, some people believe that the atmosphere of the house they live in can be influenced by previous owners. For instance, some individuals avoid buying a house where the pervious resident died there. A further well-known reason for this is the interactions of pervious residents with neighbors may be vital because it can affect the relationships between new owners and them. Turning to possible ways for implementing this research, one approach can be through conversing with neighbors as they have often some useful information about the history of those places. Moreover, another applicable method is that new owners can find some information about previous ones in their contract as some identical information may be written there. Finally, they can also interact with real state staff and ask about previous owners to find out the history of that place. In conclusion, recently some individuals have been interested about finding out the history of a house or building they intend to buy for several reasons, including curiosity, the influence of previous owners on the place, and the interactions between them and neighbors, while some approaches can be attributed to this demand.

Response: Nowadays a large number of individuals from suburbs are moving to cities in numerous countries. As a result, the number of people who are living in the countryside is dwindling. This change has its own pros and cons; however, I believe the negative impacts of this action outweigh the benefits. This essay explains the drawbacks of the increasing immigration to cities. To begin with, the first impact of moving to cities effects on developments of rural places. When people move to cities, and the number of residents in suburbs decrease, there will be less demand for developments, and providing more public facilities. As a result, government will not assign budget for developments in these areas, and people who are living over there will experience difficult situations. For instance, when fewer people live in rural area, the new roads will not establish definitely, besides, the old roads will not be maintained in most cases. In this situation the communication will become a serious problem for local people. It is widely accepted that this issue has negative impacts on cities. For instance, the rise of population in cities increase the air pollution, traffic, and noise especially in big cities. Therefore, individuals in cities ought to struggle with problems such as living in crowded places, driving in rush hours, and spending a lot of time in traffic. In this circumstance, the unsatisfaction of life will increase drastically. It is obviously considerable that government ought to overcome new obstacles like providing new public facilities for a greater number of societies in some cities in short time. Although at the first glance it would be a progress to create new facilities like schools, healthcare services, and hospitals, it would be a challenge for government to manage the crowded cities, and due to the increase in mismanaging, people will live in chaos in some areas. In conclusion, I claim that the increasing of the number of people who tend to live in cities has several disadvantages, and people who are in charge have to set rules to control the number of immigrations to cities.

Response: Nowadays a large number of individuals from suburbs are moving to cities in numerous countries. As a result, the number of people who are living in countryside is dwindling. This change has its own pros and cons, however, I believe the negative impacts of this action outweigh the benefits. This essay explains the drawbacks of the increasing immigration to cities. To begin with, the first impact of moving to cities affects on developments of rural places. When people move to cities, and the number of residents in suburbs decrease, there will be less demand for developments, and providing more public facilities. As a result, government will not assign budget for developments in these areas, and people who are living over there will experience difficult situations. For instance, when fewer people live in rural area, the new roads will not establish definitely, besides, the old roads will not maintain in most cases. In this situation the communication will become a serious problem for local people. It is widely accepted that this issue has negative impacts on cities. For instance, the rise of population in cities increase the air pollution, traffic, and noise especially in big cities. Therefore, individuals in cities ought to struggle with problems such as living in crowded places, driving in rush hours, and spending a lot of time in traffic. In this circumstance, the dissatisfaction of life will increase drastically. It is obviousely considerable that government ought to overcome new obstacles like providing new public facilities for more number of society in some cities in short time. Although at the firts glance it would be a progress to create new facilities like schools, healthcare services, and hospitals, it would be a challenge for government to manage the crowded cities, and due to the increase in mismanagement, people will live in chaos in some areas. In conclusion, I claim taht the increasing of the number of people who tend to live in cities has several disadvantages, and people who are in charge have to set rules to control the number of immigrations to cities.

Response: Nowadays a large number of individuals from suburbs are moving to cities in numerous countries. As a result, the number of people who are living in countrysides is dwindleing. This chaneg has its own pros and cons, however, I believe the negative impacts of this action outweight the benefits. This essay explain the drawbacks of the increasing immigration to cities. To begin with, the first impact of moving to cities affects on undevelopments of rural places. When people move to cities, and the number of residents in suburbs decrease, there will be less demand for developments, and providing more public facilities. As a result, goverment will not assign budget for developments in these areas, and people who are living over there will experince difficult situations. For instance, when fewer people live in rural area, the new roads will not establish definitely, besides, the old roads will not maintaine in most cases. In this situation the communication will become a seriouse problem for local people. It is widely accepted that this issue has negative impacts on cities. For instance, the rise of population in cities increase the aire pollution, traffic, and noise especially in big cities. Therefor, individuals in cities ought to struggle with problems such as living in crowded places, driving in rush houres, and spending a lot of time in traffice. In this circumstance, the unsatisfaction of life will increase drastically. It is obviousely considerable that government ought to overcome new obstackles like providing new public facilities for more number of society in some cities in short time. Although at the firts glance it would be a progress to create new facilities like schools, healthcare services, and hospitals, it would be a challenge for government to manage the crowded cities, and due to the increase in mismanagementing, people will live in chaos in some areas. In conclusion, I claim taht the increasing of the number of people who tend to live in cities has several disadvantages, and people who are in charge have to set rules to control the number of immigrations to cities.

Response: Nowadays a large number of individuals from suburbs are moving to cities in numerous countries. As a result, the number of people who are living in the countryside is dwindling. This change has its own pros and cons; however, I believe the negative impacts of this action outweigh the benefits. This essay explains the drawbacks of the increasing immigration to cities. To begin with, the first impact of moving to cities effects on developments of rural places. When people move to cities, and the number of residents in suburbs decrease, there will be less demand for developments, and providing more public facilities. As a result, government will not assign budget for developments in these areas, and people who are living over there will experience difficult situations. For instance, when fewer people live in rural area, the new roads will not establish definitely, besides, the old roads will not be maintained in most cases. In this situation the communication will become a serious problem for local people. It is widely accepted that this issue has negative impacts on cities. For instance, the rise of population in cities increase the air pollution, traffic, and noise especially in big cities. Therefore, individuals in cities ought to struggle with problems such as living in crowded places, driving in rush hours, and spending a lot of time in traffic. In this circumstance, the unsatisfaction of life will increase drastically. It is obviously considerable that government ought to overcome new obstacles like providing new public facilities for a greater number of societies in some cities in short time. Although at the first glance it would be a progress to create new facilities like schools, healthcare services, and hospitals, it would be a challenge for government to manage the crowded cities, and due to the increase in mismanaging, people will live in chaos in some areas. In conclusion, I claim that the increasing of the number of people who tend to live in cities has several disadvantages, and people who are in charge have to set rules to control the number of immigrations to cities.

Response: Choosing a career path and workplace is one of the hardest decisions to make in adulthood. While some claim that people should work in the same country as they were trained in, others believe people have the right to freely pick up the country they want to work for. I subscribe to the latter viewpoint. There are some people who believe that individuals have obligations regarding the country they were trained in. They must serve the same country and provide services for the citizens. Admittedly, the country trained the professionals to benefit from their skills in various fields to enhance the country’s living conditions; however, humans are free to decide where they would like to spend the rest of their lives, and they can share their experience with the region they graduated from. A dermatologist, for instance, might find her success in working for a developed country instead of the developing one. Thus, by immigrating, she can build a brighter future for herself, while keeping in touch with her university, and sharing her new achievements and knowledge with it. There is a group, on the other hand, who rightly argues that there should not be any limiting factors for adults, selecting their workplace. Since people do not choose where they were born, they must be given the opportunity to decide whether they want to stay or leave their country. Moreover, there might be positions that have more benefits, such as higher income, better insurance, so having the right to choose is crucial for everyone. An earthquake engineer might be given a promising job and future in another country, which he looks forward to accepting. By going abroad he is likely to develop and grow impressively. To sum up, I believe that although people have responsibilities toward the country they studied in, without doubt it is not necessarily an obstacle for them in order to follow their dreams in other places.

Response: It is said that saving money for the future is significant, especially for young people. I completely support this idea because they become independent in their lives, moreover, they always have support in hard situations. This essay will argue these beliefs about saving wages. Firstly, although it is hard to be providential early, saving money has many positive effects on everyone’s lives, especially the younger generation. They learn how to manage their wages in the future; thus, they become more independent and can make decisions by themselves. For example, if they want to buy a car years later, they can purchase it from their saved money and shoulder their responsibilities instead of asking their parents. Furthermore, as can be seen, we can not predict when problems will arise and when we need money so we should be ready for them. In other words, financial supports make people feel more relaxed and what should be mentioned is that youngsters can be calm in hard situations in the future if they prepare for them by saving money. For instance, sometimes in families, parents get different diseases by getting old and maybe they need to do surgeries. In these cases, offspring can help them. In summary, I completely agree with the idea that it is important to save money for the future, especially for the younger generation because they can learn to manage wages better and become independent, also they will have significant support when an issue happens in their lives.

Response: People have different views about the effect of advertising on society, some believe they are completely successful in their careers while others suppose people are used to seeing advertisements so they are not affected by companies. I reckon the first group is right, no matter how much time passes, companies can compel us to buy their products. Individuals are still vulnerable. There are plenty of reasons why people act like this, firstly it is on companies, due to they use new attitude for selling their products every day, so people would not used to it. Second, they conduct research on people's needs and then convince them through tricks and psychological methods that their product will solve that particular need, so a feeling of need for a product that in fact they do not need is created among people. The third thing involved in this matter is the society that is moving towards consumerism. On the other hand, there are several reasons for people who have this point of view that we are not affected by advertisements. Firstly, propaganda is repetitive so they have lost their impact. Secondly, thanks to social media people can share their bad experiences with an advertised company, as a result, others will not make any purchases from that special company no matter how much they advertise. In conclusion, my honost opinion is that people are still on the verge of believing advertisements respectfully to all the reasons the rest of society have.

Response: Although it is sometimes thought that increasing the number of olderly people in a society can bear a high volume of expenses the government, other people beleive that livinig in a community that have mre old people could be beneficial. In my opinion, deciding whether the existance of more old people in a society is useful or not depends on the amount of the development in country. On the one hand, according to some, a society could benefit of having more aged indivituals. Old people have had valuable experriences during their life, which can transfer them to the next generation. In other words, society can give a hand from the elderies to development or tackle with different problems instead of spending a great deal of time to find a solution to solve them, Japen is a good example of this, a high rank educational system because of having more old educatores in schools, who re wiser, more knowledgeable,and well-adjust people. Thus, not only society benefits of more admired and valuable people, but also the government could benefits from having more a high level of among On the other hand, it is often thought that the increse of more elderly pople in a society could grind the government under different problems. It is obvious that the more the number old population in a country increses, the more force will put on healthcare system. To clarify the point, when people get older, they probably face with various diseases such as diabetes, blood pressure and so on. Therefore, demand in healthcare field increses, and this need a heavey budget. The goverment, as a result, has to spend a noticeable money for caring of old people while this could be spent for other fields industry. Finally, in my view, both beleifs are justifiable, but the focus should depends on the level of country. For clarification of this, developed countris can meet elderies's needs easily without putting force on other fields, so benefit from having more experienced people in their societies. Developing and underdeveloped countries, on the other hand, have to waste their limited budget for caring them insted of spending the in more important fields like education. In conclusion, despite people having diverse views, I beleive that developed countries could benefit more elderly people, while this hurts the other countris.

Response: Some argue that legislation should oblige professionals to work within the country in which they received their training, while others assert that they should not be limited. Although I acknowledge the concerns of the former group, I gravitate toward the latter statement. Working in a country where one is educated can be beneficial for both individuals and the society at large. First and foremost, a significant portion of individuals' studies are funded by taxpayers, thereby citizens have the right to benefit from doctors' and engineers' services. By limiting expertise choices for the workplace, governments can ensure that people within the society profit from good services and are willing to contribute to the taxation programme. Moreover, university curricula differ from one country to the other, as they have been planned based on indigenous needs. For instance, pharmacists in China have to learn tai chi and acupuncture methods, practises that are neither taught nor used in other parts of the world. These studies necessitate professional settings to only hire individuals who have graduated from local universities. However, these statements can be observed from another perspective. Confining expertise within the borders of a country is inhumane. The notion that suggests we should limit expertise choices is against democratic law. All people pay taxes, and yet no one can demand one change their residential status based on taxpayers interest. Therefore, the disparity between professionals' choices and other groups not only disproves human rights but also dissuades individuals from obtaining higher degrees. Additionally, in developed countries, almost half of universities' seats are allocated to immigrants who wish to obtain their degrees and go back to serve their own country. Requiring these people to stay can bring about further problems. Firstly, if one forces others to work against their will, they will not be able to provide optimal guidance or make the finest product. Secondly, providing housing and other required amenities for these graduates is demanding and can place an undue burden on the governments' shoulders. In conclusion, hiring graduates from local universities, although beneficial if become an obligation, can cause irreparabale ramifications.