Essay 8. Governments around the world are spending billions in support of space programs. This money would be better spent on research into improvements in human health. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Almost each developed country spends a huge sum of money on exploring space. They build spaceships which cost billions of dollars and make a huge amount of expensive experiments in aerospace. Some people consider that there is no sense in the above mentioned expenditures.Consequently, the money which could be saved by shortening aerospace budget should be redirected to social needs. I also think so due to several reasons.

At first I think, that the huge amount of money spent on space science could save plenty of lives today, not in the distant future. For instance, it costs forty thousand dollars to make kidney transplantation, but lots of people die because they have not enough money and time to wait. It is really unbelievable, how many people's lives could be saved if even half of "space money" was redirected into improvements in human health.

One more reason for me to consider spending money on space programs as just a waste of billions dollars is the fact, that there aren't enough benefits from investing money in space programs. It does contribute to the development of science, however for an ordinary person it's almost impossible to see and feel the results. There is no difference for farmers, for example, what is going on in the space, as agriculturists would not grow their gather in airships in the closest time. We don't even know about the discoveries which had been done. Moreover some of these inventions would never be implemented.

One more cause to reduce space exploration is the opportunity to bring a mortal disease from the universe. People could die, as outside organisms could have another structure and the diseases which they cause could be fatal. On the other hand we can also bring our sicknesses to the universe.

I am persuaded that airspace exploration is caused by curious nature of humans, who always strived to discover and explore something new. But we should keep a balance between our curiosity, dangers and current needs.

Essay 7. Buying fashionable clothes is wasteful because people don't need new clothes all the time. Clothing should be bought and used more wisely. Do you agree?

Meet by clothes, see off by mind. This proverb is very topical nowadays. A lot of people buy more and more fashionable clothes to be evaluated positevely by others. I agree that buying fashionable clothes is rather wasteful, but I should admit that there are some cases, when person should "keep the trend". 

I'm persuaded that there are a number of wise ways to spend somebody's money than to waste it on the clothes which is "on the wave" only for one season or less. This money could be spent on education, housing, leisure time or hobbies instead of being thrown away. For instance, I'd better buy a new book, than a new t-shirt.

Another cause to buy the clothes wisely is the fact that new trends in fashion don't suit everyone sometimes. Some fashionable colors could make you unattractive. So red colour which is on "pick" now, doesn't suit me, as my skin a is also becoming reddish, and the same was with "pointed shoes". My legs looked as skis. My size was 39 and additional 3 sm on the "nose" of the shoes made my legs immense. 

Though there are some cases when people should follow the trends. Celebrities wear top quality designer clothes, as only wealthy people can afford themselves buying such expensive clothes. In such cases - "clothes make the man. Top managers, politicians should wear classic style clothes. There is a risk of similarity, but I consider, that there is no place for red suit in politician's wardrobe. Some detailes or accessories could make a persont look different not like the others. 

To conclude, I am persuaded that people should keep in mind the models and colours that suit them, but there should be a place for a little experiment. And of course, some outstanding occasions could be marked with creative and fashionable looks.

Essay 6. To learn a foreign language successfully you need to spend time in the country where the language is spoken. Do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays it is very popular to improve one's language proficiency by living in the country of native speakers. Though there some disadvantages of this way of perfecting a language. However, I consider that it is the most effective means of acquiring the language. 

The most important feature of the above mentioned way is the opportunity to plunge into the atmosphere of the language. The communication takes place in a definite language, as well as printed info, mass media are aldo in the language you are mastering. For instance, some of my friends spent 8 weeks in France.They lived separately, in families. Nobody in their surrounding spoke Russian. When my friends came home, everybody admitted that they srarted speak French more fluently in a short term. 

Another plus of living abroad in order to improve somebody's language skills is the fact that you won't be able to use your mother tongue. You'll have no way out as to speak a foreign language. Even your chatting with acquaintances using your mother tongue could stop the progress, so sometimes it makes sense to limit your communication with people who don't speak the language you want to perfect. 

As every phenomenon, this one has also its pros and cons, and consequently, there are some negative sides of spending time in the country where the target language is spoken.I can admit high cost of living, studying abroad, though some people work at the same time and even save some money. It is also difficult to find some considerable amount of time for living abroad. I am persuaded that there's no sense to spend less time than one year, if you want to learn a foreign language successfully. 

In conclusion, I'd like to notice, that there are some additional benefits in living abroad perfecting language, such as excellent opportunity to have a look at traditions of native inhabitants, to get some new friends and, finally, to come a part of something different, unusual.

Essay 5. Directors of large companies often receive much bigger salary increases than ordinary workers. Employers' organizations say that in a global market this is necessary to attract the best management talent. What are your views?

 The tendency to employ the best staff and to pay them considerably more than to others is becoming more popular, as big bosses prefer paying more to professionals, and receive max outcome from them. I believe that this fact has its explanation.

 First of all, I'm persuaded that each man should be paid according to their input. Motivation is more personalized and capitalized nowadays. Considerably higher salary stimulates less professional managers to improve their skills, so as to be paid more and build one's career ladder. For example, sales managers are paid more, if they got more clients this month, than the previous one. The best emploee would be rewarded according to their desire and possibility to make a profit.

 Secondly, I think, that the work of top managers is very responsible. Such people are in charge of a number of different departments. If the company director makes a mistake, the consequences make enormous influence on the whole process, leading to the stagnation or even decrease in the development of enterprise. Such failures could cost their career. I believe that such higly accountable and burning out jobs should be rewarded correspondingly. 

   In conclusion, I believe that everything which is best should cost much more than something usual. As our expectations are higher, we decide to pay considerably more. If the best personnel are hired, the best decisions are expected to be made, the biggest profit is expected to be received. I consider, that this above-mentioned phenomenon is the best motivation to evolve, to improve one's skills, to become more professional and better paid.

Essay 4.Many people are using credit cards or loans to run up huge personal debts that they may be unable to repay. It should therefore be made more difficult for individuals to borrow large amounts of money.

Nowadays it's a usual practice among people to borrow the money from banks in order to cover one's needs. I'm speaking about all kinds of loans, mortgages, payments breaking down. I believe that this tendency is not all roses and in some cases it should be made more difficult for citizens to take an advantage of this option, though not in all of the cases.

 The most significant reason to make the process of getting money from the bank more complicated, as I believe, is the statement that people should live up to their income. I'm persuaded that it's reasonable to control one's real income, therefore a desire to increase one's earnings awakes. For instance, my wish to move to Canada brought about some changes in our life. We try to earn more money and to save it, besides we have reduced our leisure expenses. Although it's not so easy.
The second reason for supporting my negative view of "easy loans" is the fact that we are not living in a fairy tale. Let's assume that someone took a loan without giving a second thought to it, if he is able to repay this sum. And one day the tale finished due to some reasons. This person could be recognized as broken, or even set in a jail. Something like this happened with little mermaid. She made a deal, but hadn't thought before if she complies with it. Everyone should think more than twice, if they really need money so quickly and in such an amount, that they apply to the bank. And, of course, some steps should be taken to ensure that they are able to return the loan.
Nevertheless, there are some emergency cases in which it is reasonable to borrow money from the bank. The first case is illness. In this situation every day counts. As a result the "easy loan" saves lives. Another cause to take a loan is full confidence that the borrowed money will paid off in spades. And sometimes it works.
All in all, there are two sides of each coin. There are some pluses and minuses in support of making more difficult for individuals to borrow money, and of course there are some advantages and disadvantages of making this process easier. In each individual case the person decides himself. Some cases are more important, some are less ones. I believe that taking loans should be a more difficult process, but in some cases the bank should be in client's shoes, and give the money as soon as it is ever possible.

Essay 3. Should non-native speakers warry about making mistakes?

I think that English now is the most well-spread language in the world among non-natives. But it also means that these non-native speakers make some considerable influence on the natural evolution of the english language. Neverthe less, those non-natives face some difficulties: grammar, vocabulary and lexical mistakes. I believe that they have to warry about this only if it complicates communication.

Every group of non-native speakers creates its own dialect of the English language, and whensuch groups meet, it may be, for instance, the business meeting of Japanese and Italians, this people can hardly understand each other, as the variations of English they speak are totally different and far from original language.
 
Communication for the sake of understanding threatens the existence of the source language as it is gradually fading becoming fool of simplified constructions which were previously regarded as grammaticaly incorrect.High language of Shekspere can not be pronounced with grammar mistakes or on Cockey. But the only who should take care of this are the originals, not non-native speakers.
 
In the end, I'd like to notice that there three causes to speak English: temporary work, the travel abroad and dayly life in english speaking country. If you travel or have a short-term contract abroad, you should be able to operate with professional terms and minimal vocabulary "survival English". It's not necessary to warry about your grammar or pronunciation if you are not going to spend a lot of time outside the country. But you have to improve your tlanguage skills as much as it is possible make it perfect. Thus it helps you to be easier understood, to adapt in your new home.

Essay 2. Should the developing countries be given financial aid ? Why?

Nowadays the countries of the third World receive some financial support from the developed ones, which I don't consider very effective.To my mind,there could be several alternatives meant at helping these countries. I don't think that financial aid is a good idea due to several reasons.

 

Firstly, I'm persuaded that the level of corruption is so high in poor countries,that more than a half of money is stolen by the state government. I believe , that there is a huge social and economical difference between the poorest starving natives in Kongo , for example , and the officials , who manage the financial aid.

 

The second cause of my negative relation to financial support is the fact that the support itself could be more rewarding if it were more personalized. There are a lot of different ways to help, although they are more demanding. The easiest of these ones is humanitarian aid. Food, clothes, toys are more than required, and this kind of support could be given by everyone.

 

I think that one more way of help could be brought by some people just doing their job... Some charity organizations could reqruit teachers to teach; doctors to treat ; engineers to built ... but without any payment from natives. One of those charity organizations is called "doctors boarderless", and I'm really happy with its existence .

 

In conclusion I'd like to notice that the idea to help is the first step on the way to the world's humanity, and we must help in each possible way, because nowadays every kind of help supports somebody's life.

Essay 1. Computers and modems made it possible for office workers to do much of their work from home, instead of working in the offices every day. Is it a positive or negative trend?

 Computers and modems made it possible for office workers to do much of their work from home, instead of working in the offices every day. Is it a positive or negative trend ?

 Nowadays the IT devices are well spread and, moreover, are implemented in almost every sphere of our dayly life. We can work at home, sometimes there is no neccesity to visit the office at all. I suppose, that in common, this phenomenon is a positive feature of evolving laubour market, but some disadvantages also exist.
 One of the most important features of working at home is a considerable economy of time meant to "getting to work". For instance, it takes me 1,5 to get to my work, and the way home is also time-consuming.
 Another plus of doing your work from home is the opportunity for employee to shift their working hours to their individual activity pick. Although, sometimes it's not possible according to externals. For example brokers can work at home, but they should do their work when New York or Tokio stock exchange also works. So, they are not able to shift their working time, but can do this with the place they work at.
 The main disadvantage which I want to admit is a reaction delay between coworkers. The troubles with internet connection or telephone line could threaten all of the work, as some problems should be solved immediately, and it's much easier if your boss is sitting next door.
 Evolution in labour sphere gives us a great many opportunities to make our work time more effective and comfortable for both employers and employees. Undoubtly, We should follow some modern trends it they don't aggravate the working process but make it more enjoyable and productive.