In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future.
In my opinion, it had crucially been easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a prosperous lifestyle in the past. I think this way for several reasons, which I will elaborate on in the following paragraphs.
First of all, a handful of people or families had wealthy and affluent life in the past, which it was mainly around typical jobs or fields of careers. That could cause the identification of a prosperous future much more straightforward. As a historical example, around world war I in the united kingdom in most rural areas, a family was the landlord of most regions. People usually worked for that family in their agricultural fields. In addition, being closer to those families could be more beneficial and led to a secure future. For this reason, it was obvious that working in correlation with wealthy people would bring success.
Secondly, nowadays, creativity has provided different paths to become prosperous. As an illustration, the development of technology and digitalization has created abundant approaches for a lavish lifestyle that makes it challenging to pick and grow in a field. For example, many startups have been advanced that broke the restricted categories of the past, which brings creativity a key role for progress. However, it is a hinder for many people to achieve.
In another way, education was limited in the past, which led to certain fields and majors to follow. Nevertheless, different majors and various branches are prepared for different mindsets to be developed in current society. That is why it can be harder for students to decide which path they want to follow in their lives. These decisions can cause frustration.
In conclusion, I believe fewer majors, jobs, and less creativity in the past could cause identifying a secure and fruitful future much more effortless. However, less opportunity means it was much more challenging to be successful in the past, and you had to work a lot harder to gain a secure future than it is today.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-25 | Zmx_6 | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-25 | Zmx_6 | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-29 | waliwaliwa | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-29 | waliwaliwa | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-29 | waliwaliwa | 73 | view |
- For the successful development of a country it is more important for a government to spend money on the education of very young children five to ten years old than to spend money on universities 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation 76
- In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure successful future 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Movies and television have more negative effects than positive effects on the way young people behave Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- The Plain of Jars is an archaeological site in the Southeast Asian country of Laos At the site hundreds of large stone jars ranging in size from one to three meters are scattered across the countryside These numerous large containers are around 2 000 year 78
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 233, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'picking'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'challenge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: picking
...ish lifestyle that makes it challenging to pick and grow in a field. For example, many ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, for example, i think, in addition, in conclusion, first of all, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1673.0 1977.66487455 85% => OK
No of words: 335.0 407.700716846 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99402985075 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.48103885553 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91346342044 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 212.727598566 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540298507463 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 618.680645161 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.9648960664 48.9658058833 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.9444444444 100.406767564 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6111111111 20.6045352989 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38888888889 5.45110844103 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26592132869 0.236089414692 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0714196884049 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110431583326 0.0737576698707 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149564084851 0.150856017488 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11532164447 0.0645574589148 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 11.7677419355 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 10.9000537634 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 86.8835125448 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 233, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'picking'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'challenge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: picking
...ish lifestyle that makes it challenging to pick and grow in a field. For example, many ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, for example, i think, in addition, in conclusion, first of all, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1673.0 1977.66487455 85% => OK
No of words: 335.0 407.700716846 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99402985075 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.48103885553 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91346342044 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 212.727598566 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540298507463 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 618.680645161 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.9648960664 48.9658058833 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.9444444444 100.406767564 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6111111111 20.6045352989 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38888888889 5.45110844103 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26592132869 0.236089414692 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0714196884049 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110431583326 0.0737576698707 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149564084851 0.150856017488 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11532164447 0.0645574589148 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 11.7677419355 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 10.9000537634 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 86.8835125448 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.