issue 70 五年后下台的那个 有拍必回 倒计时17天

nieyongUID: 2742661

TOPIC: ISSUE70 - "In any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."
WORDS: 522
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2010/3/2 20:29:44
给点建议哈~~谢谢啦~

提纲：
1.       1.That people in power step down after five years are able to make our society more energetic and help avoid corruption.
2.       2.frequently replacing leadership may sometimes impede the continuous development.
3.       3.Five years, to some extent, is proper tenure. But it's more suitable for having the first tenure of four years, and if his job is well-done and praised by the majorities, reappointment can be made legal.

The energy of our civilization is what we emphasize in the contemporary world. But is it appropriate to have new leadership after five years to get access to the success of revitalization, as the speaker asserts? In my opinion, the method of changing leadership, if properly, can truly revitalize our society. However, it needs extreme careful consideration before taken into effect.


That people in power step down after five years are able to make our society more energetic and help avoid corruption. The potential new leader will act as the competitor, and throw pressure on the current leaders which will absolutely benefit the circulation of the society and spur the people in power to behave better. If not, as the example of North Korea, the government seems to be mastered by one family, and passed down from one generation to another, thus distorting the ideology of the public and impeding the energy of the whole society profoundly. On the other hand, this method can also avoid the corruption of the leaders. As we all know, constantly living under no pressure and lacking in the consciousness of crisis will ultimately result in corruption. If replaced after five years, current leaders will consider more for the exposure when leaving the office and corruption can be diminished enormously. Just look at the feudalism in the past, once the tyrant would have been forced to step down after five years, tyranny that people suffered could not be possible.


However, frequently replacing leadership may sometimes impede the continuous development. As the new leader may have own unique perception of the conditions of the country currently, this could sometimes lead to complete changes of the policies passed by the former leader. If not tackled properly, this will cause severe amount of waste and people's misunderstanding, thus arousing public unrest.
One apt illustration involves the case in Japan. In recent years, Japan has changed its Prime Minister as well as the party governing the country over and over again. In most cases, while the former Prime Minister's policy had not been thoroughly taken into action, the latter one immediately replaced the position. Therefore, close scrutiny of Japan's realm of economy shows that, it is suffering from a severe economic recession these years and people’s complaints grows. Even in small company, careful discussion and consideration are a must in drawing blueprints in the vista of the company's future, the replacement in leadership of which is of the utmost importance.


Five years, to some extent, is proper tenure. But it's more suitable for having the first tenure of four years, and if his job is well-done and praised by the majorities, reappointment can be made legal. As with the case in America, Russia and China, which are all strong countries, have benefited from such moderate process of changing leadership, which is not too urgent nor impede the development.



In conclusion, those in power should step down after some years in order to revitalize the society and avoid corruption. However, the replacement and the time span of it should be under careful consideration, or it will result in counterproductive consequences.

nieyongUID: 2742661

有没有好人帮忙改一下啊??必回啊?

jnuredcrystalUID: 2525895

呵呵，我没经验！英语水平也一般，只有看，没法改哦！

qisaimanUID: 2703629

提纲：
1.
1.That people in power step down after five years are able to make our society more energetic and help avoid corruption.
2.
2.frequently replacing leadership may sometimes impede the continuous development.
3.
3.Five years, to some extent, is proper tenure. But it's more suitable for having the first tenure of four years, and if his job is well-done and praised by the majorities, reappointment can be made legal.

The energy of our civilization is what we emphasize in the contemporary world. But is it appropriate to have new leadership after five years to get access to the success of revitalization, as the speaker asserts? In my opinion, the method of changing leadership, if properly, can truly revitalize our society. However, it needs extreme careful consideration before taken into effect.
第一句就不懂，civilization 有很多种啊，energy是什么意思？

That people in power step down after five years are able to make our society more energetic and help avoid corruption. The potential new leader will act as the competitor, and throw pressure on the current leaders +, which will absolutely benefit the circulation of the society and spur the people in power to behave better. If not, as the example of North Korea, the government seems to be mastered by one family, and passed down from one generation to another, thus distorting the ideology of the public and impeding the energy of the whole society profoundly->negatively or destructively. On the other hand, this method can also avoid the corruption of the leaders. As we all know, constantly living under no pressure and lacking in the consciousness of crisis will ultimately result in corruption. If replaced after five years, current leaders will consider more for the exposure when leaving the office and corruption can be diminished enormously. Just look at the feudalism in the past, once the tyrant would have been forced to step down after five years, tyranny that people suffered could not be possible. 现在谈的是选举之类吧，封建那套根本就不是这个讨论范围，我觉得。另外，举个具体行业或职能的领导，比如县令。


However, frequently replacing leadership may sometimes impede the continuous development. As the new leader may have own unique perception of the conditions of the country currently, this could sometimes lead to complete changes of the policies passed by the former leader. If not tackled properly, this will cause severe amount of waste + of sth and people's misunderstanding, thus arousing public unrest.
Thus doing 结构出现两次了，换换thereby therefore etc.

One apt illustration involves the case in Japan. In recent years, Japan has changed its Prime Minister as well as the party governing the country over and over again. In most cases, while the former Prime Minister's policy had not been thoroughly taken into action, the latter one immediately replaced the position. Therefore, close scrutiny of Japan's realm of economy shows that, it is suffering from a severe economic recession these years and people’s complaints grows. Even in small company, careful discussion and consideration are a must in drawing blueprints in the vista of the company's future, the replacement in leadership of which is of the utmost importance.

Five years, to some extent, is proper tenure. But it's more suitable for having the first tenure of four years, and if his job is well-done and praised by the majorities, reappointment can be made legal. As with the case in America, Russia and China, which are all strong countries, have benefited from such moderate process of changing leadership, which is not too urgent nor impede the development.

I am afraid the rater cannot share the comparison among the three mentioned.

In conclusion, those in power should step down after some years in order to revitalize the society and avoid corruption. However, the replacement and the time span of it should be under careful consideration, or it will result in counterproductive consequences.

还是那个建议，不必举国家这么大，从小处着手，可能更简单。公司，学校等；
定义下success最好；