The bar chart shows the changes of the proportion of American people who live alone from 1850 to 2000 by age groups.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
A salient feature that can be identified from the graph is that ________.
Both were rising, albeit to widely varying degrees.
By briefly glancing at … it is apparent that …
____ jumped, attaining the peak of ___/hitting the bottom of ______
A notable difference lies in _______
The sharply contrasting difference between A and B
Some people say economic growth is the only way to end world poverty and hunger, whereas others say economic growth is damaging the environment so it must stop. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Economic well-being has long been deemed the predominant goal shared across all countries. Despite the promise of wiping out worldwide poverty and improving quality of life, its environmental implications appear to be equally pronounced, posing challenges for many governments that attempt to strike the tricky balance between public welfare and conservation of our fragile Earth. However, a closer scrutiny reveals a tangle of much more complicated, underlying issues than meets the eye.
Granted, an improved, robust economy is a self-serving panacea for those living in penury and facing critical shortage of food supply. Yet, such argument only remains theoretically valid in an idealized world. Countries suffering from these social malaises are assumed to be impoverished, the government rampantly corrupt, the social systems disreputably problematic. The possibility of the country’s self-initiated, magical policies catapulting the country along a trajectory of high-speed growth is slim, if not none. Hopes of financial assistance afforded by neighboring countries that experience economic progress may fail to deliver the desired outcomes either, since any forms of donations might run the risk of being siphoned off by corrupt officials. Once the inadequacy of economic growth to tackle social challenges has been recognized, whether it remains the sole solution becomes unworthy of discussion.
On the environmental front, leftists blame economic growth for devastation of our environment, a notion that has an element of truth in it. After all, industrialization, the powerhouse behind economic development, is the source of a range of environmental problems confronting us today. Yet, calling to end economic growth on this account is not only partial but also untenable. Industrialization is already in its terminal phase of development; many countries are now ushering in an era in which service industry becomes the economic backbone. In fact, many new, emerging industries that thrive on the Internet are eco-friendly by nature. Thus, economic growth is a vastly broad concept that should not be entirely discredited for undesirable consequences caused by only the ugliest part of the picture.
Upon a meticulous consideration, economic growth is neither the recipe for lifting the poor out of poverty nor the major culprit for environmental problems. A more profound question that warrants our attention is not whether it should be done, but how it is to be done.
Pose challenges to…
Strike the tricky balance between A and B
A self-serving panacea
Catapulting a country along a trajectory of high-speed growth
Fail to deliver the desired outcomes
Unworthy of discussion
In its terminal phase of development
Be entirely discredited for…
Lift the poor out of poverty
Warrant our attention
Environmental problems cannot be solved by individuals alone. To what extent do you agree or disagree?