The table shows the amount of money given in aid of technology of developing countries by charities in the US, EU and other countries from 2006 to 2010.
Billions of US dollars
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
The US 9.7 10.5 13.5 18 22.7
EU
countries 3.3 3.4 3.8 3.7 4.0
Other countries 2.7 2.9 3.1 2.6 3.3
Total 15.7 16.8 20.4 24.3 30
The table compares how much money was donated by voluntary organizations in the US, EU, and other countries in the period 2006 to 2010, which aimed to support technology for developing countries.
Overall, it is clear that the total aid increased over the years. The US charities were always groups that gave the most money to developing countries, compared to other areas.
It can be seen that there was a significant trend in the total aid in this period. In 2006, the figure was $15.7 billion, then rose slightly to $16.8 billion in 2007 before it witnessed a sharp growth in the following years and reached $30 billion in 2010. A similar trend was also noticed in the US. The charities in this area provided the largest allowance with the rise in each year from $9.7 billion in 2006 and reached a peak at $22.7 billion in 2010.
These contributions also increased in other countries. For charitable institutions in the EU, the figure grew minimally from $3.3 billion to $3.8 billion in 2008, followed by a small drop in 2009 before returning to climb to $4 billion in 2010. In like manner, despite some light fluctuations to the EU charities, the aid still went up from $2.7 billion in 2006 to $3.3 billion in 2010.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-18 | minhphambinh1234 | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-18 | minhphambinh1234 | 67 | view |
| 2022-01-25 | Lê Quỳnh Mai | 67 | view |
| 2021-05-28 | Chu Thị Hải | 67 | view |
| 2020-11-21 | nguyen duc | 73 | view |
- Some people think that the world should have one government rather than national governments Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 89
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of people living alone in 5 different age groups in the USA between 1850 and 2000 73
- The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Small businesses are disappearing and being replaced by large multinational companies Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages 92
- The tradition that the family gets together to eat meals is disappearing What are the reasons What are the impacts 73
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 448, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... reached a peak at 2.7 billion in 2010. These contributions also increased in ot...
^^^^
Line 4, column 222, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rop in 2009 before returning to climb to billion in 2010. In like manner, despite...
^^
Line 4, column 224, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
...p in 2009 before returning to climb to billion in 2010. In like manner, despite some l...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 379, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... billion in 2006 to .3 billion in 2010.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, still, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 5.60731707317 214% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 33.7804878049 130% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 993.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 214.0 196.424390244 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.64018691589 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6118109556 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 106.607317073 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556074766355 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 284.4 283.868780488 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.8110783832 43.030603864 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.3 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 22.9334400587 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.23603664747 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 3.70975609756 243% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More 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: 0.39930285809 0.215688989381 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136870907885 0.103423049105 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0957574550064 0.0843802449381 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.233477555605 0.15604864568 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0764097464454 0.0819641961636 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.2329268293 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.54 61.2550243902 123% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.63 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 448, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... reached a peak at 2.7 billion in 2010. These contributions also increased in ot...
^^^^
Line 4, column 222, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rop in 2009 before returning to climb to billion in 2010. In like manner, despite...
^^
Line 4, column 224, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
...p in 2009 before returning to climb to billion in 2010. In like manner, despite some l...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 379, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... billion in 2006 to .3 billion in 2010.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, still, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 5.60731707317 214% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 33.7804878049 130% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 993.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 214.0 196.424390244 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.64018691589 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6118109556 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 106.607317073 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556074766355 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 284.4 283.868780488 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.8110783832 43.030603864 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.3 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 22.9334400587 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.23603664747 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 3.70975609756 243% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More 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: 0.39930285809 0.215688989381 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136870907885 0.103423049105 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0957574550064 0.0843802449381 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.233477555605 0.15604864568 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0764097464454 0.0819641961636 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.2329268293 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.54 61.2550243902 123% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.63 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.