三篇机警作文求拍，感激中

zuohaomiao

Drivers should pay a fee to be allowed to drive on the city streets during the time when there is the greatest amount of traffic.

 

Traffic jams have always been our most headache and trouble

maker when traveling to work or school, but if I tell you that tomorrow another trouble facing you is that not only will you have to wait during rush hour, but also you have to payfor the right to travel! Seemingly ridiculous, is not it? Yet, running counter to your intuition and emotion, my point is that the payment are more likely to reduce or even eliminate your trouble instead of cause you more .

 

  The charge is well supported by both economic theory and personal experience.

Hoping not to bore you, traffic is somewhat like public goods in economic

theory, which means it is could be consumed costlessly by everyone . Obviously,

the resulting consequence is over-exploitation of some limited  resources, including

road or some other public utilities. And the most effective method to solve this

problem is charge a fee for all its users so that the resources could be allocated efficiently as you have to pay for your food or clothes. You can imagine the result of such a policy.

Some white collars or office employees may have no choice but to pay the fee, yet

at the same time, those with more flexibility may tend to avoid traveling at that time.

Not surprisingly, the traffic is less dense and those who need it most pay most.

 

  Furthermore, the money collected could be used for maintenance or buildup more

Infrastructure, or return to lower income class as subsidy. The local government now has less worry about the financial situation

and the improvement could eventually benefit all the tax payers. Some may point out that some poor people who cannot afford the fee but they must

travel when there is the greatest amount of traffic, how to solve it?. One possible and plausible

suggestion is that some of the fees could be used as subsidy for those meet some predetermined requirement.

   Another phenomenon worthy noticing is that some employers may choose to offer a subsidy for their employees as well. From my point of view, it is desirable. Accordingly, the employees do nothave to pay for the fees, and those employees without such a financial aid might indicate

that they do not have to travel at that time, at least in the mind of their employers.

 

  In conclusion, a seemingly unfair or even outrageous policy may have its magic power

to solve, or at least partly relieve  the traffic problems,. Those who have to drive pay for

their rights, no matter the fee is paid by government, employers or themselves, and enjoy

the privilege of fast speed and less traffic jam. Those who have other choice can change

accordingly.  Again, if we let reason take precedence over emotion, we could ultimately make

our world a better place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Movies or televisions have more positive or negative effect on young people's behavior?

 

 

   Very few inventions in last century like movies and TV could exert such great influence

on young people's behavior while at the same time cause so many debates  on

their effect.  Concerns over negative side increased strikingly during recent

 years. Yet, running contrary to that prevailing belief,my point is,though the bad influence

is by no means undeniable, the positive ones surly overweighs negative ones.

   The main reason supporting the opinion is that, movies and televisions serve as media of

culture to expose young people to the values and norms of our times. Televisions and movies

tell them what kind of behavior is acceptable, or desirable while others may be totally wrong

or even against the laws. Of course, some undesirable aspects are also presented on TV, just

because they actually exist in our society. We could not deny the educational side of TV just

as we could not deny the fact that our society is more civilized and modern than before as a

whole. As the mainstream of our society is moving towards progress, the main aspect of TV or

movies is positive, which mirror and reflect the reality.

   Additionally, young adults could benefit enormously from TV and movies, by either gaining more knowledge or develop a deep insight into social issues. Some TV channels

provide young people with some distant learning programs, or some scientific programs like

discovery or national geographic, which attract and educate curious young people. Furthermore,

TV could keep young adult with the latest news or international affairs, domestic politics

or environmental issues, which are all indispensable part of our life and  a basic understanding of

them prepares young adults as responsible and constructive members of society in the future.

Not to mention the role of some latest information on fashion, sports events, or music,

young adults heavily rely them to keep up with the peers and popular culture, if you want to

adjust to the fast changing society. Some movies, like Tears of the Sun, deeply touch our heart

when the heroes are conflicting with sacrifice to the nation and hate towards warfare. And an interesting documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, turns boring scientific theory into vivid story, showing usthe most urgent and disastrous environmental problem facing the entire planet, the global warming.

    Admittedly, some negative influence of TV and movies, such as sexual content and excessive

amount of violence, deserves us to pay more attention. With a strict grading system, more regulation and heavier punishment for those violate the rules, and more importantly, cooperation of the parents and society, we can reduce the harm to its minimum.

    In conclusion, some worries, though significant, should not overshadow the major the positive and educational part of TV and movies, for they are just reflections of our society, and what we can learn from them overweighs potential harm.

   

 

 

 

The only effecitve way to encourage energy conservation is by increasing prices of gasoline and electricity.

 

The assertion considers higher price of oil and electricity as the only effective way to

promote energy conservation. Though it is well supported by economic theory and practice,

it fails to take other useful method into account, so this opinion seems unconvincing to

me.

    First and foremost, strict government regulation and taxation are also helpful in preserving more energy. Prices is powerful to influence people's behavior and allocate the resources more efficiently, yet they cannot solve all the problem. The government could not raise the price so high as to  go beyond the ability of  ordinary companies or households.

Some industries in developing countries, such as cement or steel industry,  are so profitable

that the owner could still make a fortune even some of the profit has to be paid for energy. Yet these industries demand so much energy and pose threat to environment. The government should make up for the market failure by regulating some energy-dependent industries. There are also some examples about personal decisions. Some rich people may not take the increasing price of gasoline seriously and continue to prefer cars requiring more oil and releasing more pollutants. Of course we have no right to prevent them from them, but considering the welfare of others, a tax on those luxurious types might be more useful to encourage energy conservation.

  Additionally, the promotion of renewable energy and new technology on how to make full use

of our traditional energy are also effective alternatives besides price increase. Solar power,

wind power, nuclear power and even power generated by tide waves near seashore are perfect

substitutes for traditional power. It is the responsibility of government and some nongovernmental

organization to familiarize people with those new ones, and if necessary, provide some

financial support to the production. This rule also applies to the research on new technology

to make full use of energy. Increasing price could only delay the date when we use up all

the resources, while new energy and new technology could improve energy efficiency and

,even "create" energy.

   Finally, people's increasing consciousness on protecting environment is the fundamental

way to preserve energy. Without doubt, on most occasions, people's major concern is their

short term economic interest, that is why the price control are useful to reduce the natural resources used. People at the same time, however, are also reasonable and responsible citizens, who care about the sustainability of development. With the help of government and some environmentalists, more importance is attached to environment, though not enough. As long as we pay more attention to conserving energy, even without price increase, we can deal with the issue better.

    In conclusion, higher price of some resources, though effective, are definitely not

sufficient . Rigid government regulation and taxation, development of new energy and technology

and people's increasing concern over energy are all proved to be useful way to encourage energy conservation.