题目：As countries develop, their populations tend to live by themselves. What are its causes? What effects does it have on the society?
It is a tendency in modern society that the family size becomes smaller since a growing number of young people prefer to stay apart from their parents and live alone in metropolis.
This trend may involve some factors and the most rooted one can be modern urbanized lifestyle which features high level of mobility and the pursuit of privacy as well as independence. To be specific, thanks to the convenience provided by modern means of transport, the younger generation is more likely to attend university or take a job in a mega city which is far from their hometown, in which case, living with families is an unrealistic choice. In addition, private space is deemed as the necessity for well-educated youngsters who pay more attention to personal development, meditation and respect individual differences as well. It is also understandable that in order to adapt to such a competitive working or living environment, depending on oneself is a must which can be achieved through renting houses, cooking meals, and even paying for the utility bill. What’s more, when facing enormous stress at workplace, people have to focus on their jobs; therefore committing to a serious relationship or even building up a family which needs much dedication and responsibility is not a preferable option.
This change of lifestyle can generate some negative effects on the whole society. Firstly, the family bond may be weakened although they are able to live without worrying about their own lifestyles that may conflict with those of other family members. What’s worse, the elderly tend to feel the sense of isolation due to the lack of the companionship of both their adult children and grandchildren. When it comes to young people, the increasing living cost aggravates their financial burdens in daily life and also most of them postpone their parenthood.
In conclusion, personally, I believe this phenomenon is normal in the wake of social development of one country. And to meet these diverse demands, governments and social communities are expected to explore effective solutions.
In recent years, living alone has become increasingly normal around the world, especially in those major cities. There could be several reasons why this is the case, and I believe that it has both positive and negative effects on our society.
There are various reasons why many people choose to live by themselves. Firstly, because of urbanization and globalization, a growing number of people of working age have to live in cities far away from their hometown, especially those who just graduate from universities. As they d not want t disturb or be disturbed by their parents, they prefer to live by themselves. Besides, the increasing awareness of independence may also have an impact on the choice of how to live. In addition, the convenient transport, such as railway and airplane and technology like mobile phones could meet the demand for contacting with our family members and friends both physically and emotionally, which provides the possibility for us to live on our own.
In my view, the rapid increase in the number of one person households has both beneficial and detrimental effects on our community. From the perspective of economy, the trend of living individually could lead to the increasing demand of housing, which could boost construction industry, real estate, bank and other related industries which provide services and products for homeowners. On the other hand, people living along for a long time might suffer from depression and feel isolated since they lack a sense of community, which is not good for neighborliness.
In conclusion, on the societal level, living by oneself can have both positive and negative influence.
题目：Some people think that the government should decide the subject for students to study in university. Others believe that students should be allowed to apply for the subject they prefer. Discuss both views and give your opinion.有人认为应该由政府决定大学生应该学科的科目，还有人认为应该允许学生来申请他们所喜欢的学科。讨论给出你的观点。
When it comes to the major selection, the problem of on whom the decision making power should fall remains unsolved. As a result, the essay will cast light on the profits of government regulation and personal autonomy respectively.
On the one hand, it is rewarding for the government to specify the specialty for the university students. By doing this, the authority could better coordinate the subject learners with the country current market needs. Therefore, the embarrassing situation of the shortage of some particular talents and the surplus of other gifts can be circumvented. Apart from realistic gains, academic benefits can also be brought in, since a couple of endangered majors will have followers and successors. Financially concerned, most of the college candidates pursue the popular fields of study such as business, management and accounting, with the unpopular but necessary disciplines such as paleontology, archaeology and philosophy left in desertion and isolation.
On the other hand, government interferences seem unjustified in terms of the human right of an individual to determine his or her own future. Only by immersing oneself in the preferred courses can a person give full play to his or her own potential. Otherwise, education tragedies such as academic fatigue syndrome, behavior problems and drop-outs will not be a surprise. A society cannot be innovative and productive with a group of graduates who are just fulfilling their responsibilities without passion and motivation for what they are doing at the posts.
In conclusion, it is still up to individual students to reach their final decisions, although the government can balance employment market and rescue deserted subjects by the means of credits, scholarships and secured job prospects.
When it comes to the issue about the choice of subjects at university, some people argue that it should be determined by governments, but others believe that students have the right to pick up any subject they like.
On one hand, it may be more efficient for governments to arrange subjects for students. The high unemployment rate, to some degree, may arise from a fact that students pour into a specific subject, such as finance or economics, which leads to a severe competition among those graduates. However, if governments are potent to decide what kind of subjects could be chosen for students, governments could distribute students to different majors. Then, the unemployment rate may be lowered since students could avoid too much pressure in a specialization.
On the other hand, students may be more motivated providing that they could choose subjects they prefer. When young people are forced to major in some fields they dislike, some of them may rebel against governments, which may even lead to social conflicts. On the contrary, being free to take subjects may stimulate students to make painstaking efforts. Then, students may be potent to achieve their goals with a higher possibility due to their enthusiasm and energy.
From my own perspective, these two opinions do not necessarily contradict each other, but could be adopted simultaneously. It is true that students do deserve the freedom to do whatever they intend to do, but sometimes they may be blind and regretful for their former choices at university later. Thus, a compromise may be that governments need to respect students' choice, but they could provide students with a list on which some suggestions could be given. For example, governments could highlight some subjects related to too competitive careers currently, as well as some seemingly unpopular subjects that may be potential in the future, with which students may make an optimal option.