185154英语四六级雅思托福考研GRE高考GMAT大小作文宝典策略技巧范文模板.docVIP

185-154 In some countries people are no longer allowed to smoke in many public places and office buildings. Do you think this is a good rule or a bad rule? Use specific reasons and details to support your position. Not allowing smoking in public places and office buildings is a very good public regulation. I believe this for several reasons. Not only will banning smoking improve people’s health, it will also increase worker productivity and reduce workplace and public conflicts. We all know smoking is not healthy. Unfortunately, when smokers are able to smoke in public buildings, they can cause other people to be sick. They may work with people who are allergic to tobacco smoke, for example. In these cases, non-smokers have no choice but to quit their jobs. They can only endure the smoke, which is unfair. Of course, banning smoking in public buildings and offices will please non-smokers. It will also improve the smokers’ health. They will have fewer opportunities to smoke, so they will smoke fewer cigarettes. Banning smoking in office buildings can also increase worker productivity. Smokers won’t interrupt their work all the time to leave their workspace and smoke. There will also be fewer worker absences. When smokers decrease the number of cigarettes they smoke, they will get fewer smoking-related illnesses. Finally, it is a good idea to ban smoking in public places and office buildings because a ban can reduce conflicts. Non-smokers tend to get annoyed and jealous because smokers have an excuse to take frequent breaks. The most significant conflict, however, is over whether smokers have a right to smoke in public. As we have already seen, non-smokers feel they are not always given a choice. If smoking in public is allowed, they will be forced to breathe harmful air. The conflict is that both feel entitled to either the smoking behavior or the right to breathe clean air. It seems clear that banning smoking in public places and office buildings is a good ide