People in the community can buy cheaper products nowadays. Do advantages outweigh disadvantages?
Recent decades have witnessed a decrease in products’ prices, raising many questions of safety. Although the advantages related to this pattern could be pronounced, they are outweighed by the disadvantages.
On the one hand, there are many benefits when it comes to cheaper products. First, Individuals especially those living below the poverty line could access many products with reasonable prices, promoting their overall living standards. Second, Citizens’ affordability of products could enhance their spending power. This would feed into the rise in consumption tax for the national revenue, acting as an incentive for the prosperity of the country’s economy.
On the other hand, it should be acknowledged that this pattern could be fraught with many pitfalls. First, Cheaper products are invariably associated with the poor manufacturing process, culminating significant damages to the environment. In fact, many industrial parks producing cheap plastic products in Vietnam have encountered the allegations of releasing toxic sewage into the oceans, leading to the acidification of the water and the decline in the fish population as well. Second, Cheaper products actually correlate with low quality, suggesting some devastating relationships with consumers’ health. For instance, cheap food in Vietnamese markets is proved to be contaminated with carcinogenic coloring and preservatives, resulting in some food-borne diseases in consumers such as cancers or diabetes in the long terms.
In conclusion, Cheaper products could come at many costs related to the deterioration of consumers’ health and environmental damages rather than the actual benefits. Individuals should purchase high-quality products irrespective of prices to guarantee the well-being of their own.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, if, second, so, well, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1555.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 258.0 315.596192385 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.02713178295 5.12529762239 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.3217687438 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.624031007752 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 472.5 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.8065628928 49.4020404114 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.615384615 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8461538462 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.92307692308 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.116157318504 0.244688304435 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0469367451747 0.084324248473 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0326636817808 0.0667982634062 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0802048300071 0.151304729494 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0177653246003 0.056905535591 31% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.0946893788 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.69 12.4159519038 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.7 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.