Every day traffic seems to get worse on our roads. How can we reduce the
number of cars on our roads today? What alternatives can we offer car drivers?
model answer:

The more people that there are in the world, the more cars there are on the road. People are richer too and often families have more than one car. It has been proved that building more roads does not work; it just encourafes more traffic.

So, what can we do? People like their cars and the freedom and independence that cars give them. One possibility would be to raise car taxes and fuel taxes so that people do not want to spend the extra money. Taxes on new car sales as well could be increased in order to discourage people from buying. Perhaps a used car sales tax could be introduced too. In the same way motorways could have tolls charged for using them although this may just increase congestion on smaller roads as people try and avoid the motorways. The government that introduces such ideas will not be popular though and would probably lose power. Governments would therefore be unlikely to set up such new measures.

I think it would be better to try and change people‛s attitudes and offer them alternatives. Educate them more about the pollution and waste that they are causing. Persuade them to car share, use public transport or even cycle if the distances are not too long. Countries such as Holland and Denmark are well known for how their citizens are passionate about green issues and how they use bicycles when they can.

Reducing traffic is a difficult task. I don‛t think it is possible realistically to reduce car numbers but I do think that we can change people‛s attitudes and get them to use different ways of travelling.



Posted on http://blackhatielts.co.cc/
For ielts test takers...

The wealth gap between 1st world countries and 3rd world countries seems to be increasing. How can we reduce this gap? Do you think that developed countries
have a duty to assist developing countries in every way?

model answer:
Every day the rich countries in the world get richer and the poor countries get poorer. Can we reduce this gap? Of course we can. The question is whether the people in power want to do it?

Reducing the wealth gap can be achieved by cancelling third world debt, cancelling trade and farming subsidies so that third world countries can compete, getting rid of third world corruption and investing and building in third world countries using local people and skills and allowing them ownership of businesses. There are other things as well. Unfortunately there is no profit in business for first world countries to do these things. Some will do them but most will not. The ordinary man on the street wants things to be better for poorer countries and the politicians say that they will help but the politicians will in the end do what business tells them to do. Politicians also rightly feel they have a duty to protect their own countries and keeping economically dominant is part of this duty. Creating effective competition for their own country‛s businesses is not part of what they are expected to do.

This then leads on to whether I believe that developed countries have a duty to help the developing countries. Yes, I do. As an individual I believe that we have a duty to assist the poorer countries with their development in all aspects. We can provide teachers and education and doctors on the small scale and on the larger scale the things that I have talked about in the previous paragraph. Can we do this? Yes. Will we do this? See the previous paragraph again.

In conclusion you can see that I believe that there is a split between what would happen in a perfect world and what actually happens. We have a duty to reduce the wealth gap between developed and developing countries and we can do it, but it is unlikely that this will happen quickly.


Posted on http://blackhatielts.co.cc/
For ielts test takers...

Trade and travel would be a lot easier with a single, global currency that we all use.

Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Would a single currency cause any problems?

model answer:
It is clear to me that the idea of a single global currency is an excellent ideal to work towards. There can be no doubt that trade and travel would be vastly easier. On the other hand I believe that it would cause problems today.

The benefits of a single currency can be seen with the use in Europe of the Euro. Whenever you are travelling between countries using the Euro, the problems of currency changing and exchange rates are history. Similarly business between countries using the Euros is so much easier; no more worrying about exchange rate risk and pricing. Everyone‛s money is the same. The same thing is true with the US dollar. Most countries do not use the US dollar but it is accepted in many places. There are many countries that you can travel to and just take US dollars to use.

At present though a global currency would be impossible. Firstly most countries would not accept the idea. Secondly all countries are in different economic states. Some are economically very strong and some are in a state of collapse with inflation ruining the economy. Such countries could not be brought into a world currency as it would cause massive financial instability worldwide. So it is clear that a global currency would indeed cause some serious problems.

So, in conclusion I see a global currency as a future ideal but it will not happen in my lifetime. It would make trade and travel much easier but the problems it would cause nowadays would be insurmountable.


Posted on http://blackhatielts.co.cc/
For ielts test takers...

All education, primary, secondary and further education, should be free to all people and paid for by the government.

Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

model answer:
Different countries have different education systems. I don‛t know all the education systems in the world but all the ones I do know about have free school education at primary and secondary level. I certainly agree with the statement that this should be the case. I believe university education is different.

No matter what standard of income someone has or what society someone comes from, everyone should have the opportunity to have a good standard of education. This is not always what happens but it is what should happen. Private schools can be available for those who want and can afford it but the free schools should always be there. This is certainly one of the best attributes of western democracy and all countries it seems strive to attain situation although some have problems due to the economic and political situations in their countries. Governments should make sure that all their citizens have access to a good standard of free education at primary and secondary level.

Further education is different. In an ideal world this should be free but governments have a lot of demands on their money. I think that students should have to pay, maybe not all, but at least a contribution towards their tuition fees. They will be able to earn it back once they have graduated. The UK has this system whereas in the US students have to pay all their high tuition fees which can run into the tens of thousands of dollars over a full course. I am not sure if I agree with this but it certainly would make sure that students make the best of efforts to pass or all their money would be wasted.

Therefore I conclude that primary and secondary education should be freely available for all if possible but that further education should not necessarily be wholly free.


Posted on http://blackhatielts.co.cc/
For ielts test takers...