|
Should nations pass laws to preservewilderness areas in the natural state? The speaker says yes. And I also agreeto the speaker's claim. No doubt that such preservation will cost a lot, butfurther human influences on those areas will lead to severe disasters while theopposite can benefit us and even our offspring.
As we can see, if we don't preservewilderness areas, human beings will confront with quite a lot of problems andwill finally suffer from it. Plenty of examples can prove it. For instance, Amazon Forest
has been partly destroyed by Brazilians several decades ago, and it changed theclimate of the whole America Plates. As a consequence, hurricanes visit America more frequent,temperature goes up and people in many areas begin to suffer sizzlers which areover 100 degrees every summer, frozen rains and blizzards trouble us in thewinter and so forth. We are suffering more comparing to the people before.Although Brazilian government is trying its best to save the Amazon rainforest,it’s just an attempt to make up for the fault made before. Anyway, we have alreadysuffered and will go on undergoing the coming disasters as a result of thedamage of Amazon forest.
On the other side, we can benefit quite a lotfrom preserving the remaining wilderness areas in many fields. For physical andmental reasons, more wilderness areas can guarantee us better environment, aretherefore, help us to keep both physical health and also make us less troubledby things such as caring about Air Pollution Index or paying too much attentionto weather forecasts. Furthermore, for economic reasons, government's passinglaws about it will lead to profits of the nation. On the one hand, natural wildernessareas can be built into natural parks such as the Yellow Stone
National Park, and becomeprofitable as tourists’ payment of the tickets. On the other hand, lots ofspecies can be protected from human behaviors and therefore give us a hugewealth for research or leave the world natural resources to build houses ortools. No matter by which means the preservation will benefit us, it is truethat we, as well as our offspring, will live happier and appreciate theprotection of wilderness areas.
However, some people may challenge me bysaying that such kind of preservation will cost lots of money from the treasuryand governments will levy more taxes and eventually, people in the nation willsuffer from heavy taxes. From my perspective, this will happen, admittedly,nevertheless, those limited defects will submit to unlimited gains in the longrun. It's just the thing like our purchasing insurances to protect ourselves.Considering the high yield of this investment, a little bit higher taxes willcount nothing. And the opponents’ideas prove short-sighted.个人觉得你的这段反驳是比较无力的，你要考虑到具体问题的复杂性，因为题目中提到了任何一处，这不仅仅是保护与否的问题，而是在遇到具体问题取与舍的问题，即使你前面提到了很多益处，但放到具体问题里面，又该如何呢。所以不要只是停留于表面空洞的言辞，而是具体的实际的比较复杂的情况，然后根据这些给出自己的观点和态度。
To sum up, it is much necessary forgovernments to pass laws about preserving remaining wilderness areas. Thoughit's possible that we'll not see the benefits in a short term, at least thefollowing generations will enjoy the wealth left from us. | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-11-23 13:26:17
收藏
收藏
楼主
