The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999.
The table illustrates the percentage of the six primary types of households living in poverty in Australia in the year 1999.
Overall, it is clear that poverty rates were higher in single citizens than couples, and people with children were generally poorer than who without kids. However, the levels of poverty were lower among the elderly. Units are measured in percentages.
The poverty rate in all types of households in Australia was at 11% (1,837,000 citizens). Particularly, 21% of single parents were in poverty, 3% higher than the figure for single people with no kids. Just 12% of families with kids (933,000 people) were in poverty in that year.
Meanwhile, the poverty rate in families with no children dropped to just 7%, significantly higher than the levels of poverty among aged people. The figure for single elders was followed by that of aged couples, at 6% and 4% (54,000 people and 48,000 people) respectively.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-01-19 | huathibichngoc.c3.ltt@gmail.com | 67 | view |
- Some people believe that allowing children to make their own choices on everyday matters (such as food, clothes, and entertainment) is likely to result in a society of individuals who only think about their own wishes. other people believe that it is impo 78
- In the modern world it is possible to shop, work and communicate with people via the internet and live without any face-to-face contact with others. Is this a positive or negative development? 84
- The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s. 73
- The first chart below shows how energy is used in an average Australian household The second chart shows the greenhouse gas emissions which result from this energy use 94
- Topic: The use of mobile phone is as antisocial as smoking. Smoking is banned in certain places so mobile phone should be banned like smoking. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 187, Rule ID: WERE_VBB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'where' or 'we'?
Suggestion: where; we
...ut kids. However, the levels of poverty were lower among the elderly. Units are meas...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 781.0 965.302439024 81% => OK
No of words: 154.0 196.424390244 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07142857143 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.52273666998 3.73543355544 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60486751968 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 81.0 106.607317073 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.525974025974 0.547539520022 96% => OK
syllable_count: 233.1 283.868780488 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.7123616633 43.030603864 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.7777777778 112.824112599 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1111111111 22.9334400587 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.23603664747 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155226058263 0.215688989381 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0766380135391 0.103423049105 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0844459063937 0.0843802449381 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126095589193 0.15604864568 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0906889759306 0.0819641961636 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 13.2329268293 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 61.2550243902 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 11.4140731707 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 33.0 40.7170731707 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
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.