Izzat Abdullaev | IELTS 8.5

#EssayByMe #FuckAI_IWroteThis

❤️ Some experts say for road safety cyclists should pass a test before being allowed on public roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• As cycling becomes an increasingly popular mode of transport, some argue that cyclists should be required to pass a proficiency test before using public roads. While I acknowledge that such a requirement could improve road safety, I firmly disagree with making it compulsory, as it would discourage cycling without addressing the underlying causes of road accidents. • Admittedly, mandatory testing could help ensure that cyclists possess the knowledge and skills necessary to navigate busy roads safely. Unlike motorists, cyclists are generally not required to demonstrate their understanding of traffic regulations before entering public roads, potentially leaving some unaware of essential safety practices. A standardised assessment could address this by testing their ability to interpret road signs, negotiate intersections and respond appropriately to hazardous situations. For example, an inexperienced cyclist approaching a busy roundabout might fail to yield to oncoming traffic, whereas someone who has received formal training would be better equipped to navigate the junction safely. Consequently, requiring basic proficiency could reduce accidents caused by inexperienced or poorly informed riders. • Nevertheless, I believe that compulsory testing would create more problems than it solves. Introducing such a requirement could discourage people from cycling, particularly those who depend on bicycles as an affordable means of transport. This would undermine efforts to reduce traffic congestion and vehicle emissions while placing an unnecessary burden on low-income commuters. More importantly, many dangers faced by cyclists stem not from their lack of competence but from inadequate cycling infrastructure and irresponsible motorists. To illustrate, even a highly skilled cyclist remains vulnerable when forced to share a narrow road with speeding vehicles, whereas a physically separated cycle lane would offer protection regardless of the rider's experience. Governments would therefore achieve greater improvements in road safety by investing in safer infrastructure and enforcing traffic laws more rigorously. • In conclusion, although cycling proficiency tests could enhance riders' awareness of road safety, I do not believe they should be mandatory. Improving infrastructure and promoting road-safety education would be a more effective and logical approach to protecting everyone who uses public roads. 339 words ⚡@IzzatAbdullaev⚡

#EssayByMe #FuckAI_IWroteThis ❤️ Some people think that crime news and court sentences should not be broadcast on TV. To what extent do you agree or disagree? • Critics argue that crime reports and court sentences have no place on television, since they sensationalise violence and may inspire imitation. While I accept that coverage can be handled irresponsibly, I largely disagree with an outright ban, because open reporting protects the public and keeps the justice system accountable. • Granted, sceptics have a legitimate concern. Coverage that focuses on the offender rather than the victims can turn criminals into celebrities. Ted Bundy, who was sentenced to death in Florida in 1979 after a heavily televised trial, attracted admirers and fan mail despite his crimes, which shows how fascination can overshadow suffering. Graphic footage may also frighten children and distress families who have lost loved ones. These risks are real, and they explain why many parents would prefer such content to disappear from the screen altogether. • However, these problems stem from how crime is reported, not from the act of reporting itself, and a ban would cost society far more than it would save. Firstly, public broadcasts hold the legal system accountable. When verdicts are visible, judges and prosecutors know their decisions will be scrutinised, which discourages bias and negligence. Viewers of the Bundy trial could watch the evidence being tested and the sentence delivered, so nobody could claim the outcome was decided behind closed doors. Secondly, coverage educates the public. Bundy succeeded largely because he appeared harmless, often feigning injury to win sympathy, and media attention to these tactics made people more alert to manipulation. Any remaining concerns can be addressed through regulation, such as late-evening scheduling and victim-centred reporting, rather than prohibition. • In conclusion, crime news and court sentences should remain on television. Although careless coverage can glorify offenders and distress viewers, responsible broadcasting preserves public trust in the courts and gives people knowledge that may prevent future crimes. ❤️ @IzzatAbdullaev ❤️

#mood When IELTS examiners see your Task 2 essay:

"I see everyone, but no one sees me."

Salute to everyone who is working hard to drag their dreams into reality. Cold & stoic warriors. You are rare. @IzzatAbdullaev

ChatGPT got us all.

Any challenging WR questions that give me a hard time?

#EssayByMe

❤️ Task 2 question: Healthcare should be free and funded entirely by the government, rather than paid for privately by individuals. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• Whether healthcare should be provided entirely free of charge and financed by the government, rather than being paid for privately, is a matter of considerable debate. While I strongly agree that essential healthcare should be publicly funded and accessible to everyone, I do not believe that governments should be solely responsible for financing every form of medical treatment. • The strongest argument for government-funded healthcare is that access to essential medical services should not depend on a person's financial circumstances. Serious illnesses and medical emergencies are unpredictable, and requiring individuals to pay substantial fees at the point of treatment can place vulnerable families under severe financial pressure. A publicly funded system, by contrast, ensures that people can seek medical attention when they need it, rather than postponing treatment because they cannot afford it. For example, a low-income worker diagnosed with cancer should be able to receive essential treatment without having to choose between medical care and basic household expenses. Moreover, early access to healthcare can reduce the long-term burden on public services because conditions are more likely to be treated before they become severe and costly. • However, making the government entirely responsible for healthcare funding could place an unsustainable strain on public finances, particularly as populations age and medical technologies become increasingly expensive. Governments have finite resources and must also fund education, infrastructure, public safety and other essential services. If every medical procedure, regardless of its necessity or cost, were provided entirely free of charge, demand could rise considerably while resources remained limited. A more sustainable approach would therefore be a predominantly publicly funded system in which essential treatment is free at the point of use, while individuals can pay privately for additional services, greater choice or non-essential procedures. For instance, someone who wants a private hospital room or an elective treatment that is not medically necessary could reasonably be allowed to finance it independently. • In conclusion, I strongly support government funding for essential healthcare because no one should be denied necessary medical treatment due to financial hardship. Nevertheless, I disagree with the idea that governments should finance every aspect of healthcare. A combination of public provision and optional private payment would be more effective, in my opinion. ➕ @IzzatAbdullaev ➕

#EssayByMe

❤️ Question: Young people who commit crimes should be punished the same way as adults. Do you agree or disagree?

- Whether juvenile delinquents should be treated in the same manner as adults remains a highly controversial issue. While I acknowledge that equal punishment ensures fairness and deters crime, young people differ fundamentally from adults in terms of psychological development and capacity for reform, thereby requiring a distinct approach from the authorities. - Granted, it would be unrealistic and unfair to suggest that age should excuse all criminal behavior. In extreme cases involving severe violence, such as pre-meditated murder or sexual assault, young offenders should face serious legal consequences. Allowing substantially reduced sentences in such circumstances risks appearing unjust and may undermine public confidence in the legal system. Moreover, some critics argue, with some justification, that excessively lenient treatment sends the wrong message to young people, potentially encouraging further criminal behavior by diminishing the perceived seriousness of grave offenses. - However, this argument fails to account for the fundamental psychological and neurological differences between adolescents and adults. Scientific research consistently shows that the prefrontal cortex, the region of the brain responsible for impulse control, emotional regulation, and long-term planning, is not fully developed until the midtwenties.This means that young people are far more prone to reckless decision-making and peer influence. To illustrate, many juvenile crimes such as vandalism, gang-related assaults, or shoplifting occur impulsively and in group contexts, rather than as the result of calculated criminal intent. Treating such offenders as adults effectively punishes immaturity rather than deliberate wrongdoing, which is not the objective of any legal system. - Furthermore, applying adult-style punishments to juveniles often produces worse outcomes for both the individual and society. In countries where minors have been tried and imprisoned as adults, notably in parts of the United States, recidivism rates among these youths are significantly higher. This counter-productive outcome occurs mainly because adult prisons frequently expose young inmates to hardened criminals, normalizing violence and reinforcing criminal identities. By contrast, countries such as Norway and Germany adopt a rehabilitation-focused juvenile justice system that emphasizes education, psychological counseling, and gradual reintegration into society. These nations have achieved substantially lower re-offending rates, demonstrating that tailored interventions are more effective than purely punitive measures. - In conclusion, while serious crimes committed by young people ought to be addressed firmly, I strongly disagree that juveniles should be treated the same as adults by the authorities. A justice system recognizes developmental differences in young minds, and prioritizes rehabilitation, offering them a genuine chance at reform. Word count: 401 words 🏴‍☠️ @IzzatAbdullaev 🏴‍☠️

#EssayByMe #ClassWork

❤️ Question: Prisons rarely help criminals become better people. Only community service and job training can do this. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

- It is often argued that prisons fail to reform offenders and that only community service and job training can genuinely change their behavior. While I accept that traditional imprisonment has clear limitations, I believe this view goes too far, since prisons can still play a useful role when they are properly designed. - It is true that many prisons do little to prepare inmates for life after release. Overcrowded facilities often group offenders together with little supervision, allowing more experienced criminals to influence younger or first-time offenders rather than steer them away from crime. For instance, a teenager imprisoned for a minor theft may share a cell with hardened offenders and leave prison with new criminal contacts rather than any real change in mindset. In addition, a criminal record makes it hard to find work once someone is released; a former inmate applying for a job at a supermarket or factory is often rejected the moment employers see their history, pushing many back toward the same circumstances that led them to offend in the first place. This helps explain why reoffending rates remain high in many countries even after lengthy sentences. - That said, I do not think prisons are entirely without value, and I would not go so far as to say only community service and job training can help. Some modern prisons already combine punishment with education and vocational training, and offenders who complete these programs tend to have much lower reoffending rates than those who do not. Norway's prison system is a good example: inmates there can train in trades such as carpentry or cooking while serving their sentence, and the country has one of the lowest reoffending rates in the world as a result. What actually makes the difference is not whether someone is in prison or in the community, but whether they receive practical skills and genuine opportunities to work. Community service and job training are effective for exactly this reason, and I would argue they should be built into the prison system itself rather than treated as a separate alternative to it. - In conclusion, while conventional imprisonment alone rarely reforms offenders, I disagree that only community-based programs can do so. The real solution lies in combining incarceration, where necessary, with structured training and education, as countries like Norway have shown. 330 words. ✅@IzzatAbdullaev ✅

+ A sports bike. Don’t mind me caring for the environment (lol, idgaf) and putting some reps in. Kapeech.

About time to get back to self-improvement.

#ReportByIA The bar chart compares the proportion of citizens aged 65 and over in Canada, Germany, and the UK in 1980 and 2000, along with projected figures for 2030. Overall, all three nations exhibit an upward trajectory in their elderly demographic over the 50-year period. Germany consistently records the largest share of senior citizens across the entire timeframe, while Canada displays the most pronounced overall growth. In 1980, Germany had the highest percentage of people aged 65 and above at 15%, followed by the UK at approximately 13% and Canada at 10%. Over the subsequent two decades, both Germany and Canada saw substantial rises, reaching 25% and 20% respectively by 2000. In contrast, the UK’s proportion remained completely static at around 13%, causing it to be overtaken by Canada. Looking ahead to 2030, the aging population in Germany is projected to peak at 30%, maintaining its top position. Canada is expected to continue its steep rise to 25%, matching Germany’s 2000 level. Although the figure for the UK is forecast to increase to roughly 18%, it will remain the lowest among the three countries. ⚡@IzzatAbdullaev⚡

#QiyqiripApp 😯 I used to listen to British Council podcast episodes nonstop back then, and honestly, that’s 100% why my Listening has been consistently high ever since. ▪️ This is an official app by British council by the way, and you can download it here: 📱 IOS (Iphone): Download here. 📱Android: Download here. Take your listening score to Band 9.0! @IzzatAbdullaev