Recently, there have been many stories of rich celebrities or businessmen getting robbed because of their high status. This could potentially put not only themselves, but their family members at risk. Even if they keep their profile low, the expensive and branded goods they own and perhaps flaunt from time to time will still give themselves away. Money can make people into walking targets and these robbers and thieves can shoot them at point blank range. I am sure most people treasure their family's security more than their wealth. Unlike money, family cannot be earned back.

Have you seen the numerous news articles about sibilings bringing each other to court after their wealthy parents kick the bucket? Or what about the stories of their family members demanding for a lump sum of their winnings? Money can pay for branded goods and expensive cars but money definitely cannot mend a family's relationship back together. An example of this senario is the story of Urooj Khan who got poisoned with cyanide aftee striking the jackpot. As he died without a will, it 

prompted his widowed wife to hire an attorney in order to let herself rceive a share of his winnings, business and house. So can money reallu solve all of life's problems?

Finally, children who are born with a silver spoon in their mouths end up growing up into pampered spoilt brats. For most parents, when their child demands for a toy, they will not agree to buy it, however most wealthy parents will buy anything in the world as long as their children want it. In most countries, parents think that it is a disgrace for their children to enter neighbourhood or public schools. These parents would then pay and arm and a leg just for their children to be enrolled into prestigious or private schools. This ends up making the children think that one, money can solve all problems and second, the fact that they think that their parents will always he there to help them even after they grow old, making the chilsrens over-rely on their parents. 

On the other hand, many people believe that education is important and money can play a part in paying for school fees and tuition, especially for university education. However, students can sign up for scholarships and part or all of their school and tuition fees can be subsidised by the school or government. Students can also apply for loans and slowly pay the bank back when they start working. This can also allow people to learn how to get money the harder way, allowing them to understand and apply values like hardwork and delayed greatification. 

In a nutshell, money is truely the root of all problems. There are so many other parts of life that are more important than money. Family, values and children should always be cherished more than money. As the saying goes, "You don't need to lead a rich life. Good friends and a loving family are worth their weight in gold.".

Arguments are battles fought with words and emotions, people voicing out their deep-rooted opinions no matter how wrong they are.There are many topics to wage wars over, such as doing revision and amount of time allocated to watching television. One of the LARGEST issues on the topics of family arguments in this constantly growing society is the usage of the internet.

 Parents have tried their cunning strategies to get their children's glued eyeballs away from that dratted rectangular screen, from guilt tripping their children to usage of the bete noire of children, the cane. However, these have been rendered useless as children of this generation are smart enough to come up with an equally Machiavellian counters, such as sobbing big blubbery tears and begging for mercy whilst stating how pitiful they are in school. Parents will be deeply affected and let their silent grudge sit from periods ranging from three days to a week, and then the vicious cycle continues. In this cycle, what both parties are unaware of is that they are harming each other's psychological health, as they are merely just putting each other down and increasing stress and depression levels. This will have a lifelong effect in the long run, as it can lead to low self esteem levels, which in turn may lead to isolated treatment from others.

Therefore, I strongly believe that imposing rules on time used on internet usage is not the answer, as what I am seeking is a consensus between the two parties and not a one sided-victory. However, that also does not mean that I believe that leaving children to their own devices (literally), but that they should also exercise self-control. 

Firstly, children should be allowed to use the internet as long and as freely as they want because I believe that everyone should be treated as equals, with children definitely not being an exception. Therefore, if parents are allowed to use the internet freely and whenever they want, there's no reason to why children shouldn't they be allowed to be excluded from these privileges. 

Secondly, it has been proven by scientists that some children can exercise self-control if they want to. Parents can provide children with rewards if they comply with the rules, thus motivating children to listen and obey to their parents. This can also lead to happier families being able to cooperate and live together in harmony. Consensuses can be formed so that both parties are sure to reach a win-win situation. 

However, some people may argue that children aren't like adults; they don't go to work and earn money like adults do and they have a more immature mentality compared to adults. But children are not allowed to work until a certain age. Besides, when adults were young and living in the gray era, they were also goofing off with their friends. Their parents also expected them to contribute society at the right age too. In a war, there are no winners or losers. Only casualties. This treacherous loop needs to stop.

In conclusion, it is of utmost importance to ensure that children are given freedom and their rights to access to the internet. Of course, the parent has every right to step in and stop the children if they go overboard, but that is more of a last resort.

Lab testers around the world take advantage of the abundance of animals as a sign to exploit them, put them under chemical tests and then open up their bodies to observe side effects after injecting harmful drugs. All these for just one measly item- a perfume. Who would have known that all these cruel experiments are required for such luxury item? Lab testers often find other means of getting money other than being involved in the research field because it is very competitive to be successful in that field. This encourages lab testers to go for a different profession by helping to create newer products in an unhealthy way to appeal to the market. Moreover, customers are oblivious to what happens behind the scenes of making their everyday products. Therefore, unless lab testers use the results to contribute to human progression, animal experiments should be disallowed for the making of luxury items. 

Besides being used for luxury goods, animal rights activist have constantly been protesting against animal experiments. They have repeatedly educated the public and reasoned why they should not be allowed, reasons such as animals doing nothing wrong to humans. The value of respect should not only be applicable to humans but also to animals as well. Why injure organisms that did not prevent human progressions? Animals too have senses and brain of its own and are capable of feeling pain, whether emotionally or physically. A lot of lab testers have promised that the animals undergo " safe " experiments but what proof do they have besides their own words? Although animals do not have the same intelligence as humans, they are still capable of reacting to pain. What if we were the ones getting tested on instead of animals? To add on, getting experimented on without permission? Therefore, I believe and support animal rights activists to dosallow animal experiments.

Another reason why animal experiments should be disallowed is because they usually produce inaccurate results. It is claimed that these animal experiments are used to produce human medicine but the difference between humans and animals is a big stretch. If our appearances are already different, then what about other factors? For example, lab frogs withstand more heat than we humans can handle. Injecting harmful drugs inside these animals till they produce a result that says that it does not harm the animal is very redundant. In the first place, are not these lab testers experts at what is harmful and what is not? Another way to contribute and produce human medicine in a humane way is to test on human volunteers. They have provided their consent and know what the consequences if the experiments fail. Hence, this is also another key reason why animal experiments should be disallowed. 

Lab testers may argue that all animal experiments contribute to the creation of medicine, food and appliances for pets and there is hence no cause for undue worry. However, as said earlier in this essay, not all experiments are for the purpose of animal medicine. Some are for luxury products and some, even worse, are for lab testers' greed to find new medical breakthroughs without the use of humans through a quicker way. Furthermore, there are other safer ways to invent animal medicine. Companies have swore an oath to not practise cruel animal tests and these companies are the same ones that produce animal goods and such. There are also cheaper and more effective ways other than experimenting on animals. Lab testers only want the easy way out of things especially if the easy way makes big bucks. 

In conclusion, animal experiments are the result of human greed throughout decades. From luxury items to rights of animals and inaccurate experiments, there are other reasons as to why animal experiments should be banned. It is therefore encouraged that animal experiments be banned so that maybe lab testers can discover new, lawful way of benefitting the world.