It is impossible to help all people in the world, so governments should only focus on people in their own countries. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is clear that many countries especially developed ones choose to intervene in the foreign affairs. Although citizens of those nations are the ones needing assistance from the government the most, governments cannot ignore problems in other nations.
It should be acknowledged that nations could help others with economic problems. First, economically-stable countries could issue bailouts and other forms of financially assistance to ones with severe economic recession. This will solve their public debt and eventually save them from the verge of bankruptcy. Additionally, developed nations should incentivize their enterprises to conduct outsourcing investment activities in poorer foreign regions. It is proved that the increase in international companies correlates with the installment of many industrial parks, which not only generates employment opportunities but also contributes remarkably to national revenues through taxes.
It is apparent some social issues could not be addressed without the existence of the international intervention. First, Since the military might of some middle eastern nations is week, terrorism stemming from extreme rebel groups is still rife in those regions. If countries like the United States or Russia join forces and mutually conduct military operations, terror groups are highly likely to be toppled. In addition, many countries are still recovering from civil wars, which inevitably result in famine. By providing humanitarian aids including foods and basic necessities, citizens suffering could be saved.
In conclusion, governments cannot ignore people living in distress in other parts of the world. By providing financial and military supports, the citizens could enjoy better living standards.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 563, Rule ID: BASIC_FUNDAMENTALS[1]
Message: Use simply 'necessities'.
Suggestion: necessities
...g humanitarian aids including foods and basic necessities, citizens suffering could be saved. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, so, still, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1505.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 252.0 315.596192385 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.97222222222 5.12529762239 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98428260373 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02998733582 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.619047619048 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 459.9 506.74238477 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.3454358298 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.5 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.21428571429 7.06120827912 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0780965988802 0.244688304435 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0288626697697 0.084324248473 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0441980888902 0.0667982634062 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0533290069886 0.151304729494 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0376461790307 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.0946893788 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 50.2224549098 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.05 12.4159519038 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.98 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.