- UID
- 591908
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2010-12-24
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
沙发

楼主 |
发表于 2011-5-25 23:07:12
|
只看该作者
上一篇在网上找到的Issue的文章,写得不是怎么样,比起大家都熟悉的范文,字数真够牛,废话真叫多,实在没啥好写了,改一改套用下, 大家参考。
"Does a powerful businessman play a more influential role in a community or nation than does any government official, as the author maintains? As the saying puts, ""There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people's eyes"", people, of different backgrounds and with distinct experiences, will definitely view the subject from different perspectives. Complex and controversial as the issue is, it is unreasonable for the author to harshly drive to the conclusion. As far as I am concerned, to analyze the proposition comprehensively and convincingly, the final judgment should depend on the case-by-case basis, that is to say discuss the claim in different respects. On balance, my points of agreement and contention with the author involve the fundamental and deep analysis as discussed below.
On the one hand, I would like to admit that this statement, although suffers from some drawbacks, has some merits primarily in certain special cases in which the implicit rationale behind it accords with common sense and our experience in daily life. Obviously, it is unlikely for an official to make a decision alone in a democratic country. Instead, decisions are made after negotiation, argument. For example, with the separation of the three powers (the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial) and a bicameral legislature, the United States is a highly democratic country. It is hardly for me to imagine that decisions are made by one person, even the most powerful one in such a country. In fact, there are a lot of arguments and debates after every decision. In business, however, it is entirely possible for a CEO to make decision by his/herself; and these decisions often represent strategies of a company, which will influence the entire society. A prominent example is Rockefeller, an American oil magnate, formed Standard Oil which gained almost complete control of oil refining and marketing in the United States through horizontal integration. As a result, Rockefeller had a great influence on the course of a nation through his company.
On the other hand, recognizing that a more applicable choice must incorporate different aspects of the issue as sufficient as possible, I have to point out the author overstates the comparative significance of the influence of a government official. Although it may be true that, comparing to businessmen, government officials have less influence on our daily life, when the nation is in crisis, it is the government leader rather than the business leader that can make the pivotal decision. Even a cursory review of the history reveals substantial evidence to support my opinion. Take Franklin Roosevelt as an instance, during the Great Depression, he ran for President with the promise of a New Deal for American people. His administration was marked by relief programs, measures to increase employment and assist industrial and agricultural recovery from the Depression, and World War II. In such situation, it is impossible for any businessman to achieve what Roosevelt has done.
In the final analysis, the issue is a complex one which requires objective judgment and thus should never be determined indiscriminately. So different are the personal experiences and emotional concerns among people with diverse culture that a thousand individuals might hold a thousand opinions. According to me, usually, powerful businessmen do have more opportunities to influence the course of a community or a nation. While in certain special circumstances, it is government officials that dominate the trend of a nation.
" |
|