A = wins
A= buying a expensive smartphone
RA+1: AMAZING SOFTWARE SUPPORT
EXCELLENT APPLICATION SUPPORT/ VERY SNAPPY PROCESSING/
MORE RESISTANT TO SCRATCHES
RA+2: TECHNICAL SERVICE
B= buying a cheap smartphone
RB1+: AFFORDABLE DEVICE
RB2+: SAVE MONEY/ BRAND NEW ONE
ATTACKING B1= INHERENT DEFECTS
ATTACKING B2= BAD APPLICATION SUPPORT
Over the last few years there has been much controversy as to whether it is better to buy an expensive smartphone or to buy a cheap smartphone. Many argue that buying a cheap smartphone is by far the best option, while others claim that buying an expensive smartphone has more pros than cons. in this essay, I will analyze the pros and cons in order to come to a conclusion.
Undoubtedly, buying a cheap smartphone can be a great way to have an affordable device that would allow you to the basic functions of a mobile phone and to enjoy the maximum value of your money having a brand new one. it's a well known fact that buying a cheap smartphone, like there are the refurbished ones, offers you the possibility of contributing to help the environment due to the fact that when you buy a refurbished mobile phone, it means you’re using recycled materials. There is also the cliché that buying a cheap smartphone is great because gives you the opportunity of being in fashion without spending a huge amount of money.
However, when analyzed in more details buying a cheap smartphone can also be a great source of inconvenience. If we look closer, we will realize that buying a cheap smartphone isn't actually all it is cracked up to be. For one thing, cheap smartphones usually have inherent defects. We shouldn't forget either that cheap smartphones usually do have very little room for your apps and other data.
On the other hand, buying an expensive smartphone offers you a far wider range of possibilities when it comes to excellent application support or very snappy processing. Take for instance amazing software support. Experience shows that expensive smartphones have the sharpest screens, fastest hardware, and are more resistant to scratches. Another major advantage is that if you should need an efficient technical service, all your needs would be met.
To sum up, even though buying a cheap smartphone has some advantages like having access to an affordable device or not having to spend a huge amount of money, it can also cause inconvenient by inherent defects and bad application support. Besides, the fact that buying an expensive smartphone allows you to receive a qualified technical service if you need it and offers an excellent software support, makes it quite clear that buying an expensive smartphone constitutes the best option by far.
Haz clic aquí para edit A (A WINS!) B
A= being stereotyped
RA+1: Being well known
RA+2: Source of employment
Enhance our economic growth
B= not being stereotyped
RB1+: run away from one-sided (biased) reality
RB2+: being lazy and revellers
ATTACKINGB1= lack of interest for tourists
ATTACKINGB2= low incomes
Over the last few years there has been much controversy as to whether it is better to be stereotyped or NOT to be stereotyped. Many argue that not being stereotype is by far the best option, while others claim that the way others label us has more pros than cons. In this essay, I will analyze the pros and cons in order to come to a conclusion.
Undoubtedly, avoiding the stereotype created around Spaniards can be a great way to run away from a biased reality about our country like being considered lazy or revellers. It's a well known fact that getting rid of this stereotype offers you the possibility of promoting cultural values. There is also the cliché that avoiding being stereotype is great because gives you the opportunity to leave prejudices.
However, when analyzed in more detail, getting rid of our stereotype can also be a great source of problems. if we look closer, we will realize that avoiding some Spaniard’s stereotype isn't actually all it is cracked up to be. For one thing, avoiding our stereotype may cause a lack of interest for tourists. We shouldn't forget either that avoiding our stereotype could very easily lead to lower incomes.
On the other hand, being stereotyped offers you a far wider range of possibilities when it comes to being well known or enhance our economic growth as a source of employment. Take for instance being well known. Experience shows that thanks to our gastronomy (tortilla, paella or jamón serrano) and traditional dances like flamenco everybody has heard about us at least once. Another major advantage is that if we should need to be recognized all over the world, all our needs would be met.
To sum up, even though not being stereotyped has some advantages like run away from a biased image of our country or being judged properly, it can also cause lack of interest for tourists and lower incomes. Besides, the fact that being stereotyped allows us to be well known worldwide and enhance our economy growth, makes it quite clear that being stereotyped constitutes the best option by far.
Haz clic aquí para editar.
H TOPIC: MASS TOURISM IN MOUNT EVEREST, is it good?
R1+= adventure tourism
R2+= source of employment
R1-= negative effect
R2-= unsustainable future
R3- = trash/ rubbish / garbage
R4- = deforestation
When we consider the topic of mass tourism in Mount Everest, the first thing that comes to mind is adventure tourism and source of employment. But is mass tourism in Mount Everest really the best option when climbing turned commercial. This essay will look into the advantages and disadvantages of mass tourism in Mount Everest.
IT'S TRUE THAT...
Many argue that adventure tourism is the wisest choice as it allows you to trek through the mountains and there is no denying that mountain trekking attracts people who desire to see exotic an unknown places, primarily in the developing world. To some extent trekking is one of the highest paying employments in Nepal today.
Yet, there are factors like negative effects or unsustainable future that should also be taken into account in order to make the best choice. There is much more to consider than just adventure tourism or source of employment. The core problem is that the environment and communities begin to change as a result of their newfound popularity. Villages are also becoming more dependent on cash rather than the traditional means of barter and reciprocal labor. Also, if you consider the fact that the influx of tourism has had a negative effect on the local communities, especially the youngster Sherpas, who drop out of school the moment they get the chance to join an expedition, then mass tourism in Mount Everest does not seem to be a great idea.
Moreover, mass tourism in Mount Everest has two additional major drawbacks, namely trush and deforestation.
Perhaps the most visible impact of trekkers on the Himalaya is the growing amount of rubbish left behind. As this regards, it is estimated than over the past forty years, eighteen tons of garbage, from tin cans and beer bottles to oxygen tanks have been dumped on Mount Everest alone. And last, but certainly not least, you must consider that perhaps greater problem than all of the rubbish is deforestation.
The forests have typically been used by the Nepali for fuel wood. However, the consumption rates between Nepali and tourist greatly differs and this is where the problem lies. The amount of fuel wood used by one trekker per day is more than the average Nepali uses in an entire week.
SO “NO” WINS
To sum up, although on the face of it mass tourism in Mount Everest sounds like a good idea when it provides the largest sources of employment, a more in-depth analysis suggests otherwise. In fact, most evidence points to the fact that it negative effects, unsustainable future, rubbish and deforestation is what you need to realize that mass tourism has had dramatic effects on the environment.
az clic aquí para editar.