People argue that immigrants should adopt the local culture when immigrating to a new country. An alternative view is that they can adapt to a new environment by establishing a minority community. Discuss these two views and give your opinion.

Nowadays, individuals are divided into two groups in terms of adaptation to

immigrants

. Some people argue there should be an adaption for

immigrants

in a new local country.

However

, others, claim that making a minor community would be a better decision for reworking. The following essay takes a look at both sides of the argument On the one hand, foremost, settlers should adapt to society

instead

of creating minor communities,

also

minor neighbourhoods could cause some problems in society.

Furthermore

, the community might have adverse consequences for the newcomers themselves.

For example

, Armenian

immigrants

, who moved to America in the 90s, have created their own associations

instead

of trying to adapt.

Thus

, they are not able to find new jobs,

also

even someone still does not know English.

As a result

,the minor communities harmed the population

instead

of helping. So

immigrants

should be adapted to the new country on their own

On the other hand

, minor folk are very useful and have a lot of benefits for

immigrants

who move for a short time, only for making money, mostly for manpower.

Due to

that fact, there is no need to learn a language or try to adapt to the culture, they will just work in the neighbourhood.

Thus

,the minor public is mostly for short-term use and should be used properly exactly with that purpose. To summarize, in my opinion, even if foreigners prefer a minor society

this

type of adaptation should be used in few times and should choose a more beneficial and domestic adaptation to the local culture. Because associations' disadvantages outweigh the advantages.