issue70 政治类 感觉不好，请大家帮忙拍拍

SkysijieUID: 2233317

Issue70: “In any profession- business,politics, education, and government- those in power should step down after fiveyears. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization throughnew leadership. ”
在任何领域中-商业、政治、教育、政府-掌权者都应在五年后就让位。这是任何机构获得成功的最好的方法：通过更新领导者而保持活力。

平衡观点
1． 长时期的掌权会导致领导者缺乏创新和权利的滥用
2． 相反，新领导者能够给企业注入新的活力
3． 但是，短期更换领导者也有缺点，一方面没法坚持长期的政策，另一方面，一个长期的领导者拥有稳定的团队能创造出好的成绩,这是新领导所不能比的

Leaders who establish the mainstreamdeveloping direction play a essential role in any professions. The authorclaims that leaders should abdicate when they are in power for two years inrespect of revitalization of any corporate. I basically agree with theassertion.

To begin with, there is no doubt that a toolong term leadership will bring out some disadvantages regardless in anyprofession. Firstly, our leaders will less likely to step with the rapid rhythmdue to the declining of creative. In most cases, a long term leader would relyon experience, which gained from earlier work, when he\she is making a decision,planning for a constitution or moving an amendment. Unfortunately, doing workdepend on the used experience cannot adapt the situation perfectly at thepresent time. Secondly, the issue of abusing power will become obviously if aleader in power for a long time. One celebrated person said that (and I paragraph):“Authority, which bring people fortune, enjoy and ascendance, often misleadauthorities.” Undoubtedly, mass of fortune and freely entertainment easilyallure people, especially those who have power in control, frequently. Inbrief, leaders, whether they are rectitude or not, possibly make some mistakesin controlling the development of enterprise in any profession.

On the contract, new leaders would bringone field new blood for creative and prompt ardor of faculty. A simple examplecan illustrate the statement properly. Toshiba, one of the largest Japanesecompanies, announced that among notebook computers it produced, one model hadserious defect. Users in North American could choose either replacements withan upgraded model or full refund; meanwhile, no such offer for users in China.Consequently, the sell in Chinese market drop down immediate due to the factthat Chinese users are outraged and refused to buy any of Toshiba’s products. Whenthis news were reported, the former leader be changed to be a new one, whoestablish new policy for Chinese, control the sell of the product in chinaimproved. Thus, no one can deny that a new leader will renew enterprises insome sense.

However, new leaders have no capability to bringenterprises benefits all the time. On the one hand, there is no advantage forthe long term proposal to change the leadership frequently. For example, China hasdetermined a plan for 50 years to advance economy. Many people, including myself,hardly can imagine how the policy will be actualized and the economy willdevelop if the leader of china changed all the time. On the other hand, astable leadership has capability to maintain the steady team to research andstudy technology which new leadership have no capability to compare with. SetMicrosoft as an example. Bill Gates, who guide the most celebrated company formany years, with his researchers, who followed him for a long time, developed anew operating system called “vista”, which be predicted to be milestone of digitaltimes in the recent. Compared with it, if Microsoft’ team are variability,possibly we would not running “vista operating system”. Obviously, a leaderwith his invariable researchers can create new product due to each of them can communicateand cooperate with other well.（这段论证的太烂了，写得晕忽忽的）

To draw a conclusion, whether new leader orold authority, both of the two have benefit and disadvantage to firms. Thus, anenterprise in every profession shouldn’t revitalize the leadership frequentlyaim to obtain success.