“People often complain that products are not made to last. They feel that making products that wear out fairly quickly wastes both natural and human resources. What they fail to see, however, is that such manufacturing practices keep costs down for the consumer and stimulate demand.”
Which do you find more compelling the complaint about products that do not list or the response to it? Explain your position using relevant reasons and/or examples drawn from your own experience, observations, or reading.
My Syllabus:
Main Idea: It would be unsuitable to draw a hasty generalization to conclude which is more compelling between the complaint and the response; the answer should depend on the nature of the products.
Syllabus:
On one hand, it is especially workable to apply the practices to make products that wear out fairly quickly to keep costs down for the consumer and stimulate demand when those products that are newly introduced into the market or the technology is not completely mature. (For example, computer, LCD screen TV sets, fashion garments) + By contrast, it would be unwise to make those products to last….
On the other hand, it is advisable to make products that last long when those products are at their mature stage and normally competition is fierce in its market. (TV sets)
请大家share你们的提纲啊
my syllabus：
In producing products, should the factory make them wear out quickly or last longer? While I agree that some products with high replacement rate do cost less and stimulate demand, but the advantage does not keep in all products.
First, it will be helpful to consumers that some products last longer. (The products can keep high quality, need large cost to replace them and used frequently by customers：cars, furniture)
Second, the products that have short life will be benefit to the society, especially the technology need be improved and the economic situation is not good. We need stimulate demand, improve the economic life and then consider the resources.(example: developing countries)
其实两个例子是很好的，车和鞋子
车就要耐用，因为贵和安全的原因，要尽可能持久，最终淘汰是因为太过时了或者污染环境。
而鞋子，如果怎么穿都穿不坏的话，导致生产过剩，造成经济危机
my syllabus：
In producing products, should the factory make them wear out quickly or last longer? While I agree that some products with high replacement rate do cost less and stimulate demand, but the advantage does not keep in all products.
First, it will be helpful to consumers that some products last longer. (The products can keep high quality, need large cost to replace them and used frequently by customers：cars, furniture)
Second, the products that have short life will be benefit to the society, especially the technology need be improved and the economic situation is not good. We need stimulate demand, improve the economic life and then consider the resources.(example: developing countries)
哇, 写的很好,写的很好, 尤其是second, 站的角度很高, 居然考虑到了通过消费来刺激经济的繁荣, 强!
小错误: will be benefit -->are beneficial to
Second, the products that have short life will be benefit to the society, especially the technology need be improved and the economic situation is not good. -> Second, the products manufactured not to last long are beneficial to society, especially when the technologies behind them are improved quickly and constantly and when the economic situation is not satisfactory. (Examples PC, developing countries.)
thanks, my view comes quickly， and my word comes very slowly. i need more practice
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |