Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 117 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 90% |
Arguments: | 22 |
Debates: | 31 |
yeah cats less fussy to keep. keeps the rats away to. but not a fan of ppl keeping more than 2 cats they smell if there is too many of them, could kill my neighbour right nw am sick of hes illegal cats like 10 of them the whole passage way stinks
yes uniforms should be made compulsory beaus there is a whole 'other side of the story' about uniforms that most people never even consider.
- uniforms are a method of expressing order and unity and are one of the key elements in distinguishing a school from another.
- because we can use uniforms to distinguish from others, uniforms can help a great deal in life outside school itself, say a group of students (wearing their uniform)were seen helping some elders, or cleaning up a public place or something like that they would definitely get good publicity to them selves and the rest of the school and in doing so promote the school- wouldn't u want to send ur kids to a school known for its good deeds?? or turn the situation around - a group of students misbehaving.. i think u already know the out come..would u want to send ur kids to a school with a history of misbehavior???
-so yes school uniforms should be made compulsory besides, (unless a dress code is imposed) imagine wat kids would wear if uniforms were not compulsory and try to imagine the image, since we are referring to "skul kids" most of whom have no control and can go wild.
-
Nuclear energy: i.e Japan
Japan's use of nuclear energy despite the fact that it has and may
pose very negative effects on the environment has been largely
supported by the Govt, yet it still engages in methods to battle
environmental challenges.
The Govt knows the dangers of nuclear energy form personal past
experiences in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is aware of the effects
it has even on future generations yet to come.
A solution the Govt could implement that is more environmental
environmental friendly is the use of geothermal power stations.
Yet it doesn't. Are there any possible reasons to why it so
strongly sticks to nuclear energy?
|