坚持写

jannyguo

[tr][td=885][tr][td=885]“A powerful business leader has far more opportunity to influence the course of a community or a nation than does any government official.”[/td][/tr][tr][td=885]Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your
own experience, observations, or reading.[/td][/tr][tr][td][/td][/tr][tr][td=885]1) My view is whether the government or a powerful business leader has more opportunity to influence the community depends on the ecomic structure of the country and the type of the company.[/td][/tr][tr][td=885]2) The powerful business leader influenced is controled by the government in the countries which are political oriented.[/td][/tr][tr][td=885]3) A powerful person could be more flexible to make decision, 2. 而企业领导往往会有更大的决策权，而他们的决策也更容易被贯彻。在一个经济为中心的国家相应的他们的对社区和国家的影响力也就更大[/td][/tr][tr][td]4) 共同影响[/td][/tr]
The passage asserts thatpower business leader has more opportunity than any government official to influence a community or a nation. To some extent, I agree with the author's general statements since a lot of successful business organizations did change the way people live. However, the author unnecessarily extends this broad assertion to an exaggeration while overlooks other compelling factors that may affect this issue. On balance, my view of this issue involves the fundamental analysis as below.[/td][/tr][tr][td]On one hand, I would like to admit that this statement, although suffers from some obvious drawbacks, has some merits primarily in some special individuals such as Apple CEO Steven, Microsoft CEO Gates, and other talent nature business creators. All those power natural business creators have changed they way people are living. After all, powerful business persons, profit oriented, are more flexible and focused to adjust the business strategy to meet or even improve people's need. And it is easier to control since the business organization do not need to directly tax people; therefore, their influences are more obvious and even more opportunities available for them, especially in a free economic country.[/td][/tr][tr][td]On the other hand, recognize that a more applicable choice must incorporate different aspects of the issue as sufficient as possible. As stated that the author over exaggerated the powerful person, and failed to take into account other essential factors. In short the assertion is problematic in two aspects. The first the author overlooked the function of government. Government official do not have conflicts with society, instead they are paid servant. Unlike companies, the government do not profit because the actions they take are just doing thier jobs. For examples, in the economic recession, usually the governmental officials take actions to recovery the economic. Especially in public service, transportation, only government investment can improve it. Secondly, the author underestimated the influence of government, that is to say that government has more influence that more opportunities over all. Government can influence the community by implement policies. It might have been noticed that different polices in different region or nation has different results. For example, attract more foreign investment in some city, while set strict limitation in another region. All the policies made to either improve the economic situation or improve the living environment, or both. Accordingly, I tend to concede that when it comes to some non-free economic circumstances it is partially appropriate.[/td][/tr][tr][td]In conclusion, issue of whether government or powerful person is more influenced to community or nation is complicated. There is no directly answer. Different economic situation and government structure could have different results. Applying same government policy might have different results if the economic structure are different, and even same powerful person, might failed in another nation at same era. Therefore, the best and most effective method to improve community or nation is to apply the appropriate polies, and encourage powerful person to do more good for society.[/td][/tr]

jannyguo

麻烦 会编辑的人帮忙 怎么乱七八糟的

jannyguo

[tr][td=890]“With the increasing emphasis on a global economy and international cooperation, people need to understand that their role as citizens of the world is more important than their role as citizens of a particular country.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
[/td][/tr][tr][td][/td][/tr][tr][td=890]The passage asserts that a person's role as citizen of the world is more important than that of a particular country based on the increasing of globalization. To some extent, I agree with the author's statement because more and more global cooperatition requires people to behavior in an similar way, at least that people could understand each other.However, However, the statement uneccessarily extends its broad assertion to an irreversible extreme while overlook some compelling factor might affect this issue. On balance, my view of this issue involve foundametal analysis as below.[/td][/tr][tr][td=890]On the one hand, I would like to admit that this statement, although suffers some obvious drawbacks, has some merits primarily in some region of the world where globalization is prevailed. Each individual's role as citizen of the world is much more important than the role as one's oven country citizen. For example, New York, Singapore and HongKong, as world financial centers, have little natural resorces but have a high load of population. People work in those countries have to look outside and cooperate with different people from all over the world. Their jobs have more connections with other countries and their life would be influenced by the people who work there. Thefore, behavior as a citizen of the world, respect different culture would be the basic requirments and the most import to acheive long term cooperation.[/td][/tr][tr][td=890]On the other hand, recognizing that a more applicable choice must incorporate with different aspects of the issue as sufficient as possible. As stated above, the statements exaggerated the role as citizen of the world, and failed to take into account of the role as a citizen of one's own country. First, there are a lot of people who lived in very isolated areas, for example Mori people, who live in New Zealand and have few chance to contact outside, therefore those peple still keep thier traditional way of life because they are not influenced by the outside world. It is clear that even globalization has reached almost every corner of the world, focusing on outside of the world is outside of world is still not important for such people like who are living in isolated area. Secondly, keep one's religious while respect others is important no matter where one live. Secondly, people should fullfill the obligations as a citizenship of one's country, such as paying tax and votes, even if they are living in other counties.Accordingly, i tend to cocede that when it comes to certain circumstances it is partially appropriate.[/td][/tr][tr][td=890]In conclusion, which role is important as a citizen determined by the specific economic situations at which people stay and human environment in which people learn. Behavior more as a world citizen do not have affect one' tranditional culture because those two roles are not imcompitable. For example, one can keep the religious while at the same time behavior as globalized. Futhermore, a lot of issues are golobalized issue, such as resources and enviroment, and people are not limited by role of citizenship to support those issues. Therefore the role as citizen of the world and that as ciziten of the particular country are interdepent.[/td][/tr]