Some businesses prohibit smoking in any of their offices. Some governments have banned smoking in all public places. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right course of action? Give reasons for your opinion.
The prohibition of smoking within
work
premises by certain businesses and the implementation of fanatical censorship in public spaces by several authorities have sparked debates regarding the appropriateness of such
a part. While
a number of argue in favour of these stringent policies, asserting their necessity for mutual well-being and building productivity, others contend that they infringe upon individual liberties. In this
essay, I will outline my perspective on this
contentious issue.
Advocates of fanatical bans in service and mutual areas emphasize the myriad benefits of such
ethics. Firstly
, these measures contribute significantly to mutual strength by mitigating the adverse effects of secondhand smoke exposure on non-smokers. Research indicates that passive fanatics pose serious health risks, including respiratory ailments and cardiovascular diseases. By instituting fanatical prohibition, businesses and laws uphold their duty to safeguard the well-being of their constituents and employees.
Secondly
, prohibiting fanatical in the company enhances productivity and fosters a conducive work
habitat. Smoke-free work
reduces absenteeism due to
smoking-related illnesses and boosts employee morale by creating a healthier company atmosphere. Moreover
, a smoke-free climate mitigates the risk of fire hazards, thereby ensuring occupational safety and minimizing property damage.
However
, opponents of delirious injunction argue that such
quotas encroach upon individual freedoms and autonomy. They contend that adults should have the prerogative to make personal lifestyle choices, including delirious, without undue interference from regulatory authorities. Furthermore
, critics caution against the potential for overreach, whereby the ministry imposes paternalistic integrity that curtails respective liberties under the guise of urban fitness initiatives.
Despite these objections, I firmly support the implementation of smoking bans in offices and mutual spaces. The collective health benefits and the promotion of a smoke-free environment outweigh concerns regarding individual autonomy. Moreover
, smoking is not merely a personal choice; it has broader societal implications, affecting non-smokers through secondhand smoke exposure and imposing significant healthcare costs on society as a whole. Therefore
, it is incumbent upon businesses and governments to enact policies that prioritize public health and well-being.
In conclusion, while
the prohibition of zealous in work
and mutual places may evoke criticism from a number of quarters, I contend that it represents a prudent course of action. By prioritizing mutual well-being and company productivity, these parts contribute to the overall
welfare of society. As such
, I wholeheartedly endorse the implementation of the frenzied boycott as a necessary step towards fostering healthier and safer habitats for all.Submitted by [email protected] on
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
lexical resource
Some vocabulary is incorrect or overcomplicated ('fanatical' instead of 'smoking,' 'delirious injunctions' instead of 'smoking bans'). Simplify your language to ensure clarity and precision.
task achievement
Provide more specific examples to support your arguments. This will make your essay more convincing and demonstrate a deeper understanding of the topic.
coherence and cohesion
Work on transitions between ideas and paragraphs to improve the logical flow of the essay. Use linking phrases effectively.
task achievement
The essay covers both sides of the argument and provides a clear personal viewpoint.
coherence and cohesion
The introduction and conclusion are well-defined and align with the main points discussed in the essay.
Fully explain your ideas
To get an excellent score in the IELTS Task 2 writing section, one of the easiest and most effective tips is structuring your writing in the most solid format. A great argument essay structure may be divided to four paragraphs, in which comprises of four sentences (excluding the conclusion paragraph, which comprises of three sentences).
For we to consider an essay structure a great one, it should be looking like this:
- Paragraph 1 - Introduction
- Sentence 1 - Background statement
- Sentence 2 - Detailed background statement
- Sentence 3 - Thesis
- Sentence 4 - Outline sentence
- Paragraph 2 - First supporting paragraph
- Sentence 1 - Topic sentence
- Sentence 2 - Example
- Sentence 3 - Discussion
- Sentence 4 - Conclusion
- Paragraph 3 - Second supporting paragraph
- Sentence 1 - Topic sentence
- Sentence 2 - Example
- Sentence 3 - Discussion
- Sentence 4 - Conclusion
- Paragraph 4 - Conclusion
- Sentence 1 - Summary
- Sentence 2 - Restatement of thesis
- Sentence 3 - Prediction or recommendation
Our recommended essay structure above comprises of fifteen (15) sentences, which will make your essay approximately 250 to 275 words.