[I]
WAQ A1=flip-flopping
WAQ A2=a lump to my throat
WAQ A3=pay lip service
[Ⅱ]
WAQ B1=contest
WAQ B2=失敗に終わった試み
WAQ B3=(He) felt that (he now) had the basic information (he) needed to begin
大問Ⅰ
I believe it would be better to be 20 years old with very little money. The main reason is that youth gives you time, energy, and endless possibilities, which are much more valuable than money. At 20, you have decades ahead of you to try different things, learn from your mistakes, and build your career from scratch. You can always earn money later by working hard. On the other hand, being 60 and wealthy is comfortable, but your time and physical energy are limited. You cannot buy back youth with wealth. Therefore, having the time to shape my own future makes being 20 a much better choice.(112 words)
大問Ⅱ
Based on the graph, there are two important trends regarding myopia. First, the overall prevalence of myopia is projected to increase dramatically by 2050 across all age groups. This trend is critical because it suggests that modern lifestyles, likely involving more screen time and less outdoor activity, are creating a serious global health issue. Second, the absolute number of older people with myopia will grow significantly. In 2000, the number dropped sharply after age 40, but in 2050, it remains high even for people in their 60s and 70s. This is an alarming trend because society and healthcare systems will need to prepare for the long-term burden of providing eye care to a rapidly aging population. (124words)
(A) 賛成
Japan should encourage food banks, but only as a backup system alongside welfare. Kerenne (2025) notes that rising living costs push many households to rely on local food banks, and some banks now offer workshops in budgeting and benefit applications. This means support can be immediate and also help people regain independence. Critics argue that promoting food banks lets governments dodge their duty; Thurman (2025) calls this outsourcing poverty to charities. That criticism is valid when welfare is cut or when governments celebrate charity instead of reform. Still, refusing to support food banks would punish families first. For example, if a parent loses work or faces a sudden medical bill, a food bank can prevent hunger that week while public benefits are processed. The government should encourage food banks through transport support, food-safety standards, and partnerships with retailers, while strengthening welfare so charity never replaces rights.
(A) 反対
Japan should not encourage food banks as a central policy, because hunger is a right-based issue, not a charity project. Thurman (2025) argues that governments can shift responsibility to charities, and this becomes morally wrong if welfare keeps shrinking. He also warns that a growing charity industry can expand while poverty remains. Supporters respond that food banks show community spirit and can even teach life skills; Kerenne (2025) notes that some banks provide financial planning and guidance on benefits. However, these benefits do not fix low wages and high living costs. For example, if a town depends on donations, supplies may drop when prices rise, exactly when poor families need help most. Government praise of food banks may also hide unmet need. Japan should focus on stronger cash support, simpler benefit procedures, and better job protection. Food banks can exist, but the state should not promote them as the solution.
(B) 賛成
Japan should fight food loss and food waste with clear national rules and incentives. Tyenigh (2025) explains that huge amounts of food are discarded and that this waste damages the environment and food security. Some people argue that changing consumer habits is the main answer, but Tyenigh (2025) shows many consumers blame others and still waste food. Education helps, yet rules shape behavior. For example, Japan’s “one-third” delivery rule can push retailers to throw away safe products early; moving toward a more generous standard could reduce waste. The government should also standardize date labels, because confusing labels make families discard edible items. Critics may say lawmakers move slowly and NGOs can act faster, but only the state can set nationwide standards. This matters even more as climate change increases droughts and floods. With targets, public reporting, and support for retailers that sell “ugly” produce, Japan can cut waste and protect supply.
(B)反対
Japan should address food loss and waste, but the government should focus on light rules and strong incentives, not heavy control. Tyenigh (2025) notes that asking legislators to standardize labels can become an excessively lengthy process, while NGOs may achieve the same goal faster by persuading corporations to cooperate. Some people insist only strict national regulation will work, yet strict systems can create paperwork for small shops and raise prices for consumers. For example, if every store must submit detailed waste reports, staff time will increase and food may become more expensive. Instead, the state should fund NGO campaigns, support technology that matches surplus food with users, and reward retailers that discount “ugly” produce. It can also publish simple guidelines and public rankings to encourage competition. This approach still respects Tyenigh’s (2025) call for stakeholders to work together, but it avoids turning waste reduction into another bureaucracy.
repeatedly destroy their heroes out of jealousy.
always ruin inspiring strangers driven by envy.
keep destroying charismatic newcomers because of envy.
never stop ruining talented leaders through jealousy.
