Since the World War II finished, the Earth becomes peaceful again and thus the number of international travels increases rapidly every year. It is because of the needs of worldwide tourists to gain more knowledge of the other countries as well as to enjoy the wonderful sceneries of all continents after the tragedy war had come to an end. However, with the evolvement of technology, especially the Internet, people predict that there will be less cross-country travel due to the fact that they tend to sit in front of the screen and watch the world through the programs shown, instead of buying a ticket and fly directly to the destination. In my opinion, this is clearly a negative trend, which affects the society badly on many perspectives.
To the tourists, traveling through the screen definitely cannot give them the most interesting feelings. Researches show that real-world tours still have their own valuable attractiveness. People enjoy watching, tasting, touching and feeling with their real sense, not by imagining things shown on TV, Internet, or any dry essay. Real tours will give them memorable memories, which they cannot have when seeing sceneries on the media flash before their eyes. This passive way of traveling also bring them to many health risks. Physically, they will be threatened by obesity and heart diseases since they are not moving. Mentally, people become lazier, and thus feeling stressful and depressed.
To the countries, less international travel in the future means less income. Many countries depend on this non-smoking industry profits to develop. If this happens, their doors to the economic development will be closed. Moreover, when there are fewer cross-country tours, the job opportunities for local people will decrease. In some regions, the inhabitants are mostly illiterate and the only way for them to survive is to make money from tourism jobs. Without it, they will easily fall into poverty and maybe even crimes, which are dangerous to the countries’ security.
Some people support the opposite side of the problem. They point out that less international travels, in other words, more screen-traveling, give people another approach to various cultures with less money to spend. To restate, this method does harm to both people and the countries, as shown above. Some argue that cutting down non-essential travelling can save the planet as there will be less oil, gas and petrol be used. In the meanwhile, this might be true, but scientists are making efforts to invent more and more eco-friendly fuel to reduce the pollution. Preventing travelling by means of transports then also prevents people from exploring the world and widen their knowledge. Accordingly, this somehow slows down the development progress of the community.
In a word, there should not be less international travel in the future since it will lead to many problems to individuals and also the countries. Governments should initiate more policies to impulse the development of this essential industry to bring benefits for both their citizens and the nation.
Since the World War II finished, the Earth becomes peaceful again and
thus
the number of
international
travels
increases
rapidly
every year. It is
because
of the needs of worldwide tourists to gain more knowledge of the other
countries
as well
as to enjoy the wonderful sceneries of all continents after the tragedy war had
come
to an
end
.
However
, with the
evolvement
of technology,
especially
the Internet,
people
predict that there will be
less
cross-country
travel
due to the fact that they tend to sit in front of the screen and
watch
the world through the programs shown,
instead
of buying a ticket and
fly
directly
to the destination. In my opinion, this is
clearly
a
negative
trend, which affects the society
badly
on
many
perspectives.
To the tourists, traveling through the screen definitely cannot give them the most interesting feelings. Researches
show
that real-world tours
still
have their
own
valuable attractiveness.
People
enjoy watching, tasting, touching and feeling with their real sense, not by imagining things shown on TV, Internet, or any dry essay. Real tours will give them memorable memories, which they cannot have when seeing sceneries on the media flash
before
their eyes. This passive way of traveling
also
bring them to
many
health
risks
.
Physically
, they will
be threatened
by obesity and heart diseases since they are not moving. Mentally,
people
become lazier, and
thus
feeling stressful and depressed.
To the
countries
,
less
international
travel
in the future means
less
income.
Many
countries
depend on this non-smoking industry profits to develop. If this happens, their doors to the economic development will
be closed
.
Moreover
, when there are fewer cross-country tours, the job opportunities for local
people
will decrease. In
some
regions, the inhabitants are
mostly
illiterate and the
only
way for them to survive is to
make
money from tourism jobs. Without it, they will
easily
fall into poverty and maybe even crimes, which are
dangerous
to the
countries’
security.
Some
people
support the opposite side of the problem. They point out that
less
international
travels
,
in other words
, more screen-traveling, give
people
another approach to various cultures with
less
money to spend. To restate, this method does harm to both
people
and the
countries
, as shown above.
Some
argue that cutting down non-essential travelling can save the planet as there will be
less
oil, gas and petrol be
used
. In the meanwhile, this might be true,
but
scientists are making efforts to invent more and more eco-friendly fuel to
reduce
the pollution. Preventing travelling by means of transports then
also
prevents
people
from exploring the world and widen their knowledge.
Accordingly
, this somehow slows down the development progress of the community.
In a word, there should not be
less
international
travel
in the future since it will lead to
many
problems to individuals and
also
the
countries
.
Governments
should initiate more policies to impulse the development of this essential industry to bring benefits for both their citizens and the nation.