Large shopping malls are replacing small shops. Whats your opinion?

Good or bad?
It is indeed an inevitable truth that large shopping malls or supermarkets are
spreading their wings all around the globe and in this fast pace growth, small shops
are losing their shines and if this trend continues, these small shops will become
obsolete in this era of consumerism. It seems to be a good development up to some
extent, which is here to stay for a long time.
To begin with, the layout, infrastructure and interior design of such malls facilitates
consumers to shop conveniently. Such malls are equipped with huge amenities like
large parking space, air conditioning, security, escalators, and food court and
entertainment areas which make them much more attractive place than small shops.
People can get all the things like groceries, clothes, reading materials, electronic
items, cinemas and restaurants under a single roof and people get better environment
from such establishments.
Further, these shopping malls are also being managed and monitored by security
guards and CCTV cameras, therefore many customers feel safe while walking around
in these malls. Thus, these shopping places are considered better from all aspects by
majority of shoppers.
Moreover, malls are proven good as growth in the retail sector leads to innumerable
prospects in terms of local entrepreneurship and employment generation.
To recapitulate, I would like to reiterate that malls are providing innumerous
advantages to the end users and all these associated benefits make these shopping
malls better alternative in comparison to small shops and this trend is definitely a
positive trend for the future of retail markets.

Nowadays, we are facing severe problems (serious difficulties) with the conduct of
children all around the globe and bad conduct of children prevails in almost all
societies of todays world. We have been searching for ways to inculcate disciplines
and obedience in youngsters by telling them what to do and what not; still children do
not imbibe any of them. However, it is not a good option that we should make parents
accountable for any wrongdoing by their offspring and they receive punitive actions
for the mistake of their children.
To begin with, children are innocent and fun loving and they do so many activities for
their amusement and even they do not understand the minute difference between
good and bad due to which sometimes, they commit serious acts. Parents try their
best to mould these young minds by telling them the values of deference and civility,
but due to immature minds, young ones, majority of the times, do exactly opposite of
what they are told to do. So, putting blame on parents for their childrens misbehavior
does not seem a welcome step.
Further, if we make parents responsible for their childrens misconduct, parents may
apply strict rules on their children due to which youngsters may lose their innocence,
fantasies and joy of being a child. This may turn young adults into irresponsible person
who becomes work-shy, indolent, may get out of hand and indulge themselves into
drug abuse, gambling and prostitution. This forms an unstable society and may then

create a burden on the authority since the government has to find out the ways to
cater these social ills.
To conclude, I believe that parents should not held answerable for their children
misconduct as it may make parents more strict which ultimately impact the childrens
attitude and consequently, it impacts the society.
Inventions are carried out to give comfort, facility and convenience to people.
However, many a times it is seen that these inventions create huge problems, as well,
to the world, thereby raising a question whether they are really beneficial or not.
There are several benefits and drawbacks associated with these inventions. To begin
with, we have invented the nuclear energy to generate electricity so that we can
provide the basic amenities to the masses in this highly demanding era as most of the
luxurious providing appliances are completely dependent on the electricity.
Further, with the invention of computer which is the biggest invention of the 20 th
century, has facilitated human life in uncountable ways. Nobody can argue that the
acquisition of knowledge is more fun and easier with computers. The mere act of
touching and exploring this device constitutes an enjoyable task for a child. This
accompanied by the relaxing attitude and software interactivity, usually contributes to
a better grasping of new knowledge. The growing utilization of video based learning in
modern schools over text book based knowledge transfer is the best possible example.
However, innovations like computers and internet have created a lot of problems like
viruses, personal data hacking, credit card scams, all of which are result of these
inventions. In addition, todays inventions are largely responsible for global warming
and ozone layer depletion which has serious consequences on human health.
To recapitulate, it seems that the potential benefits associated with new inventions are
more significant than the possible dangers as all of these drawbacks should be
thought of as a certain price that people have to pay due the characteristics of the
world that we live in and we should try to control these issues rather than blaming the
innovation.

There is no doubt that over packaging of products has become a trend in todays
competitive world. Producers are trying to attract consumers by making products
lucrative looking as possible, without bothering about its impact not only on
environment but the users as well. However, I believe that consumers can play an
indispensable role to curb this over packaging practice as manufacturers may not
ready to stop unnecessary packing.
The cost of over packaging is actually put a pressure on users pocket as this cost is
actually added to the cost of the product. The type of packing found in pharmaceutical
industries can be taken as an example. Pills and tablets are found to be packed in
much bigger and colorful strips than actually needed. Such packaging is of no concern
to users and cost of medicines would have definitely been lesser if sold in a simple
outlook.
Further, most of the material used in packaging is plastic which is non- disposable, so
it adds to the environmental pollution to a great extent. Furthermore, paper is also
used for packaging due to which millions of trees are being cut down to create
packaging materials. If this practice goes unchecked, there are lesser trees available

to absorb a carbon emission which leads to deforestation, global warming and air
pollution.
To conclude, over packaging is not something that should be encouraged, so it is our
prime responsibility to refuse over packaged items which will force producers to avoid
over packaging of materials, otherwise it would have devastating consequences which
may have long term impacts on our environment as well as on our health.

The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education- Einstein.

What does he mean by that? And do you think he is correct?
Education is the acquiring of knowledge, skills, habits, values and beliefs from our
teachers and seniors. There is no doubt that in our traditional education system, the
content of the education is limited to already established customs and practices. We
only learn the knowledge, which has been discovered or invented earlier. The format
of the education limits the learning of the students to only cramming and the exams
are also assessment of more or less the retention power.
Firstly, when Einstein gave this statement he experienced that students learned
through a formally designed education pattern is curtailing their thought process. In
fact, formal education limits the doors of imagination and creativity. There is a little
chance for exploring things because the best way to learn something is to experience
it and this conventional approach restricts out of box thinking and pupils ability to go
beyond the scope of their degree and search for solution themselves. They all are
expected to provide the same answer which is available in books. Thus, Einstein
actually meant that his education did not encourage him to reach his maximum
potential.
Moreover, every individual is unique and everyone has different approach and
perspective towards study. Some of them may show reluctance towards some
subjects, but simultaneously they may be keen to learn their favorite subject. For
instance, a student who has a keen interest to learn about different chemicals has a
little scope of learning in standard schools as he has to whole day to attend the
laboratory session.
To recapitulate, I would like to reiterate that confined scope and standardized learning
system is a big obstacle in a process of learning.

Every individual in this world is different from another and all individuals have distinctive qualities of their own
due to which they have different perspective and approach towards life. If an individual is expected to work
in an environment where he or she has to follow certain set of principles of work then it may lead to the end
of his or her creative abilities.

To begin with, many of those individuals who did not wish to work under rigid work environment are very
successful in life as their creativity brought them the desired output. We have a great example of Bill Gates
who is the owner of world famous Microsoft Company. He believed in his creative thinking and energy and
with that he created revolution in the computer industry. The power of working with a free mind yields
remarkable results.
Although conformity proves to be detrimental in the interest of an individual who would have done
outstandingly well by putting in practice his creative thinking but in certain cases conformity is a must. In all
the armed forces around the world the soldiers are expected to follow a certain code of conduct. In such

institutions unconformity does not help but conformity makes the organization run. Law is one such
rigid/inflexible institute where creativity and individuality is of no use and if people exercise their duties and
responsibilities according to their own, then there would be too much chaos.
To recapitulate, I would like to reiterate that although unconformity would give noteworthy results but it would
certainly be drastic in those sectors where conformity is essential for the organization to exist.

Sports not only improve the skills and abilities of athletes, but it also help them to
express their lust for thrill, adventure and passion. It is irrefutable that some life
threatening sports may results in lifelong injuries or even death. However, I believe
that death is fatal; banning a sport wont save anyones life.
Dangerous sports such as river rafting, skydiving, bungee jumping, bullfighting, etc
should not be banned as they help sportsmen to gauge their core skills and explore
their strength through these sports. These sporting activities depict the real courage
and zeal of the competitors. It improves their decision making skills under extreme
conditions because a single wrong move can have severe consequences.
Rather than banning these sports, organizers and professional athletes should adopt
safety measures like using protective guards, deploy reinforced wall in front of
spectators on a race track and so on. Also, governments should bring some control
measures or legal safety standards to lower the risk to the players.
However, some people believe that threatening games should be banned as there are
myriad risks associated with it. Proponents of this view point argue that these sporting
activities not only put the life of contestant in jeopardy but at times also harm its
spectators that have flocked from different places to watch their favorites in action.
To recapitulate, I believe, shunning vulnerable games is not a viable solution; instead
such games should be performed after sufficient training and under supervision.