首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
As the world’s richest people, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett call on wealthy people to devote half of their wealth to public wel
As the world’s richest people, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett call on wealthy people to devote half of their wealth to public wel
admin
2020-01-15
60
问题
As the world’s richest people, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett call on wealthy people to devote half of their wealth to public welfare and charitable causes. Some government officials even proposed it should be made mandatory for billionaires to donate money to charity. The fallowings are opinions on whether billionaires should be forced to donate money.
Write an article of NO LESS THAN 800 words, in which you should:
1. summarize briefly the arguments;
2. give your comment
Yvette Cazobon from the US
As a very American American, I strongly believe in freedom all the way, there would be so much uproar about people being forced to donate, that is would not be considered donating, it would be taxes that don’t go to the government. There are also many millionaires/billionaires donating already, Bill Gates has donated 28 billion himself, and it seems like people think he still does not donate enough. The average American makes less than 2 million in their life, I think 28 billion is VERY generous donation. And that is just Bill Gates, don’t forget the other rich people donating. To summarize, it’s their money, they can do what they so chose, so don’t try to force people to give away money, because people are already doing it themselves.
Frances Snead from Mexico
Every religion in the world demands caring for the poor, sick and needy. It is the obligation of the rich everywhere to help those less fortunate not only for religious and humanitarian reasons but to contribute to the economic growth and development of the country. Habitually poor people breed revolution and destruction.
Millions of Mexico’s poor have no land, no job prospects and no hope of improving their life, especially the native tribal people who have been subjugated by the Spanish for centuries. It is obscene to think one man has all that wealth at his disposal and would not assist his country and its people.
James Alex from the UK
Billionaires should donate the vast majority of their personal wealth. Since much of these billionaire’s "money" is tied to stocks which they can’t really sell without their companies going down with them, it makes sense that people such as Bill Gates will still have extraordinary net-worth. But anything they don’t need for a reasonable day to day and supporting their families should go to charity. The same goes for all people.
Kanhaiya Kumar from India
I think billionaires should donate enormous sums of money to charity, and I do mean "charity" and not "freeloader". I’m an idealist and I believe that to whom much is given or even of whoever earns infinitely more than he needs, much is expected. In a world where opportunity is astronomically unequal, having lots of money just for one’s self while there are millions of people in the world living in poverty just doesn’t make sense.
Manala Aigbi from Brazil
I believe billionaires have worked hard for their money and should not be taxed twice just because they are richer than the average person. Maybe a progressive system of taxation should be introduced and utilized by the government and in regards to billionaires being more involved in charity. Of course, most billionaires should be interested in well being of less privileged individuals, as our care for each other is what makes us human.
选项
答案
It’s Not Feasible to Force Donation Recent years have witnessed a growing donation by millionaires/billionaires such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. They gave away most of their money and left little or even nothing to their heirs. Some government officials proposed it should be made mandatory for billionaires to donate money to charity, which has fueled a heated debate among people. People from the US and Brazil share the point of view that it is rich men’s freedom whether to donate, while people from Mexico, the UK and India hold that it is the obligation of the rich to help the poor, sick and needy. I insist it is not feasible to force the rich to donate for the sake of both human right and social development. Firstly, in most modern democratic countries, personal property and fortune are protected by laws. It is human’s basic right to cope with their own money and wealthy people are no exception. Since the rich have already been taxed, it is unfair and unreasonable to force them to give away their fortune. If the rich became reluctant to help the poor, it might trigger hatred and discrepancy between the rich and the poor, which might result in a higher level of crime in local society. Secondly, it is important to note that forcing billionaires to donate may hazard social and economic development in the long run. Statistics have shown that wealthy people create more GDP and job opportunities for the society. Under such circumstances, compulsory donation can dampen business investment and social long-term development As there are various means to improve the welfare of the poor, I can’t see the reason why donation is mandatory for the rich. There is no doubt that donation is needed for religious and humanitarian reasons. However, compulsory donation can cause damage to human right and impose adverse effect on social and economic development.
解析
材料罗列了五个来自不同国家的民众对是否该强迫富豪捐款的看法。其中来自美国和巴西的民众持反对意见。而其他人则支持这一做法。
选段一、五是反对的观点。这两个人都在首句就亮出观点:强调自由(believe in freedom)和不能被二次征税(should not be taxed twice),他们认为强制捐钱实质上就变成征税了。材料五认为他们的钱财也是辛苦所得(worked hard for their money)。由此可总结反对的理由因为人们有自由决定是否捐赠,且富豪的钱财也是辛苦所得。
其他三人都赞成强制富翁捐钱。选段二认为出于信仰和人道主义(religious and humanitarian reasons),富人有义务(obligation)帮助不幸的人。选段三首句指出富豪应捐赠大部分的个人财富。Since后解释理由是因为富豪捐赠后仍有不菲的股票净值(extraordinary net-worth)。选段四认为独享财富是毫无意义的(doesn’t make sense)。由此可以总结支持者的理由主要有出于宗教和人道主义考虑,为了国家经济的发展,富人捐赠后仍能保持充裕的财富以及众贫独富的无意义。
开篇:总结两方对是否应强迫富豪捐款的观点,并提出个人见解——从人权和社会发展的角度来看,强迫富豪捐钱不可行。
主体:列出强迫富豪捐钱不可行的理由。一是在现代民主国家,个人财产受法律保护。强迫富人捐钱可能会导致贫富之间的仇恨和矛盾;二是强迫富豪捐赠可能会阻碍社会经济发展。
结尾:总结全文,尽管捐赠是有必要的,但强迫富豪捐赠会损害人权和社会发展。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/vybK777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
Fundingpublictransitisoneofthebiggestproblemsfacingcitiestoday.Oftenthetroubleisthatafewhigh-cost,low-rider
A、Thechapel.B、Thepulpit.C、Thecongregation.D、Thetower.B句(3—1)中,男士问女士蒙特利尔圣母圣殿最大的教堂用品是什么,女士在句(3—2)中回答说是布道坛。因此答案为[B]。
文学家在人群里,好比朗耀的星辰,明丽的花草,神幻的图画,微妙的音乐。这空洞洞的世界,要他们来点缀,要他们来描写。这干燥的空气,要他们来调和。这机械的生活,要他们来慰藉。他们是人群的需要!假如人群中不产生出若干的文学家,我们可以断定我们的生活,是没有趣味的。
有些男人还在怀念昔日以男子为中心的年代。那时,他们下了班回家,热腾腾的晚餐已摆好在桌上,妻子儿女围上来问寒问暖;家中大事小事多由自己作主,因为男人作为一家之主承担了全家经济生活的来源。妇女走出家门就业后,男人的供养职责相对减小,在家庭的地位也变得不像从前那
生活就像一杯红酒,热爱生活的人会从其中品出无穷无尽的美妙。将它握在手中仔细观察,它的暗红色中有血的感觉,那正是生命的痕迹。抿一口留在口中回味,它的甘甜中有一丝苦涩,如人生一般复杂迷离。喝一口下肚,余香沁人心脾,让人终身受益。红酒越陈越美味,生活越丰富越美好
多极化趋势正在全球范围内继续发展。各种重要力量相互依存,相互制约,相互合作,有利于世界的和平与稳定。全球有近二百个国家。国家不论大小、贫富、强弱,都是国际大家庭的平等成员。世界和平要靠各国人民的共同努力。世界事务应由世界各国共同参与。我们生活在一个丰富多彩
1925年2月24日,国父孙中山病危时,留下一段《家事遗嘱》:“余因尽瘁国事,不治家产。其所遗之书籍、衣物、住宅等均付吾妻宋庆龄,以为纪念。余之儿女已长成能自立,望各自爱,以继余志。此嘱。”中山先生艰苦奋斗40年,功勋卓然。但终身廉洁,
她笑了笑,又转了一回弹槽滚儿,对他说,“如果是空枪,俺就依你!”说完,重新举起了小左轮。她的手有点儿抖,瞄了许久,突然,颓丧地放下枪,好一时才说,“俺不认命了,只求你从今以后别再当匪,好生与俺过日子!”他愕然,呆呆地望着她,像是在编织着一个梦幻。
老家的大胡同属南北走向,地势北高南低,建筑设计独具匠心,从村南大街进入胡同头往里一看,有一个高大的门洞,雄伟壮阔,设计精美,古香古色,就像一个十分壮观的牌坊,门洞的两扇大门很大,木料很厚,很结实。沿着门洞再往里看,以为就是那么几栋房屋,也看到头了,可再往深
生活就像一杯红酒,热爱生活的人会从其中品出无穷无尽的美妙。将它握在手中仔细观察,它的暗红色中有血的感觉,那正是生命的痕迹。抿一口留在口中回味,它的甘甜中有一丝苦涩,如人生一般复杂迷离。喝一口下肚,余香沁人心脾,让人终身受益。红酒越陈越美味,生活越丰富越美好
随机试题
人在某一瞬间的心理活动选择了某些对象而忽略了另一些对象。这一特点指的是注意的()。
某男高血压病人,59岁,心前区不适3年,突起胸骨后压榨样疼痛伴烦躁、大汗1h入院。当该病人出现烦躁、呼吸困难、发绀、剧烈咳嗽时,心率120次/分,律整,血压13.3/8.0kPa,以下哪种药物最适合()
肺炎球菌肺炎的典型热型是
病人不能站立,检查有无气腹,应摄取
预算一个组织在特定时间内固定资金运用情况,这种预算是()。
岗位抽样的特点包括()。
金鱼藻是一种高等沉水植物,有关研究结果如图所示(图中净光合速率是指实际光合速率与呼吸速率之差,以每克鲜重每小时释放O2的微摩尔数表示)。问题:该研究中净光合速率达到最大时的光照强度为________lx。在黑暗中,金鱼藻的呼吸速率是____
下列关于设定行政许可与行政处罚的说法中,正确的是()。
甲从乙处购买一批货物,向乙支付1万元定金,现乙拒绝履行合同,甲有权要求乙返还定金()。
有以下程序:#includevoidfun(char**P){++P:printf(“%s\n”,*P);}main(){char*a[]={“Morning”,“
最新回复
(
0
)