Cashless society is becoming a reality. More and more people are using credit cards for payment, and less people use cash. How realistic do you think it is and do you think it is beneficial or problematic?
Recently, the phenomenon of a cashless society is becoming a reality and more people are using credit cards for payment and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complicated procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that less people use cash and more people are using credit cards can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, using more credit cards by more people in cashless society is becoming a reality can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in this fact that the crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of this common phenomenon and accordingly complex procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, using cash and credit cards by less people in society is realistic might increase the consequences of critical issues. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notions of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of more people in cashless society are using more credit cards than cash and becoming a reality far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint the thorny issues' potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 408, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ividuals. I am inclined to believe that less people use cash and more people are usi...
^^^^
Line 5, column 68, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...c arena, using cash and credit cards by less people in society is realistic might in...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.5418719212 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1591.0 1207.87684729 132% => OK
No of words: 292.0 242.827586207 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44863013699 5.00649968141 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04560284013 2.71678728327 112% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 139.433497537 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571917808219 0.580463131201 99% => OK
syllable_count: 519.3 379.143842365 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 20.5024630542 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.1170530684 50.4703680194 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.636363636 104.977214359 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5454545455 20.9669160288 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.54545454545 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.375408312278 0.242375264174 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.133065179611 0.0925447433944 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.135738108104 0.071462118173 190% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.228277909162 0.151781067708 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0771221605402 0.0609392437508 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.17 53.1260098522 53% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.63 11.5310837438 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.12 8.32886699507 122% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 55.0591133005 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.3980295567 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.