Some countries encourage teenagers to have part time job and see that’s a good thing while others disagree . Give your opinion and discuss both views.

Medical studies advise that smoking can have detrimental effects on smoker’s health as well as on people around his vicinity. Therefore, the ban on it is recommended by government agencies and anti-smoking supporters in public places which can be more beneficial in terms of the healthiness and its influence on others. Firstly, the major and predominant benefit is reduction in a spread of carcinogenic compounds contained in tobacco via fume of cigarettes. The inhalation of these chemicals can severely damage the lungs’ capacity of air intake and triggers a development of lung cancer in a long run. Thus, the strict restrictions are required to limit this health exploitation of innocents. Secondly, the influence of this addictive habit should be taking into consideration next to its impact on fitness. The governments are actively working on to reduce the encouragement of it on individuals by prohibiting the advertisement on television and social media. In contrary, its consumption in public place does indirect advertisement and the adolescent’s teenagers are the major group of prey. For example, the administrative agency’s survey states that cigarettes consumption has increased by 28 % among youngster for last decade. So, the banning can reduce these numbers more effectively. On the other hand, there can be an economical dent on businesses of bar and pub due to this disallowing step according to opponents. However, health issues dominantly outweigh the minor drop in cashflow. Morally, such nuisance is not advisable for a healthy society. In conclusion, it is blindingly obvious that the smoking must be banned in public gathering spots such as parks, bus stops, metro stations, picnic spots, etc. , and benefits of it advocate themselves. This solution can lead us towards one aspect of ideal neighborhood.