Obesity has been linked to excessive sugar consumption. Some believe that sugary drinks should be taxed to dissuade people from drinking them while others think that a tax is unnecessary and that pubic education is the best way to decrease sugar consumption.
An excessive sugar consumption believed highly associated to obesity and sugary drinks is one of insane products. There is a compelling notion that whether implying sugar tax or through education would be able to reduce overall sugary drinks consumption. Social economist believes that increasing the cost of the drinks leads to decreasing demand of them. Other group of socialist believes education is a better way to do so. In this essay I will elaborate both arguments and explain why I believe education is a better way to dissuade people from drinking sugary drinks.
Taxation implication aims for increasing the retail price, it becomes less affordable for consumer so it can dissuade people from drinking them. However, a small amount increased on the retail price, it may only create a minimum impact on consumption desire. For example, Danish government implied twenty percent tax rate on all sugary drinks recently. The quantity of sugary drinks sales was not reduced, in fact, it was slightly raised up. It is because consumers were seeking alter products to replace taxed sugary product. Also, they were going to German, where is significant cheaper, for buying those drinks. As a result, consumption of sugar was stay at a high level.
On the other hand, Australian government promotes healthy lifestyle through public education program. Australian decides cutting down their sugary drinks after being informed how sugar impacts our body. Consequently, Australian consumption on sugary drinks was shown on official statistic was reducing.
In conclusion, as per argument points mentioned above, I am inclined to think that education generates an enormous motivation to change people behavior. Therefore, I believe education is a better way to dissuade people from drinking sugary drinks.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, however, if, may, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.5418719212 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 8.36945812808 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 5.94088669951 67% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 5.75862068966 295% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1530.0 1207.87684729 127% => OK
No of words: 282.0 242.827586207 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42553191489 5.00649968141 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75613823546 2.71678728327 101% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 139.433497537 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606382978723 0.580463131201 104% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 379.143842365 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.6157635468 152% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 12.6551724138 134% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.5024630542 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.0260715703 50.4703680194 52% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 90.0 104.977214359 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5882352941 20.9669160288 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.05882352941 7.25397266985 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 2.91625615764 206% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.406850535696 0.242375264174 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126023839614 0.0925447433944 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0868753715588 0.071462118173 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.246637744345 0.151781067708 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114798383092 0.0609392437508 188% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 12.6369458128 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.1260098522 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.9458128079 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 11.5310837438 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.32886699507 111% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 55.0591133005 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.94827586207 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.3980295567 81% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.5123152709 86% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 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.