A government has a responsibility to its citizens to ensure their safety. Therefore, some people think that the government should increase spending on defense but spend less on social benefits. To what extent do you agree?
Some people argue that since the citizens’ safety is the government’s responsibility, it should increase the budget on defense and decrease the spend on social welfare. I disagree with this point of view because many consequences will follow this financial reduction for social benefits.
To begin with, a budget cut on social benefits will negatively interfere with the progression of the society. Firstly, public healthcare will probably be one of the first areas to be affected by this reduction. Without this service, people must pay a large amount of money for hospital bills and medicines. Consequently, many people, especially poor people, will be apt for staying at staying at home rather than going to a hospital for appropriate treatments. Secondly, the money for education will also likely be cut off while this is the deciding factor in the national strength. The government can try to prevent crimes by increase the military appearance in the street. However, this may not be the most efficient way to prevent crimes. A more well-educated population will have a low crime rate because people will have a higher chance of securing a job and a better understanding of laws. For some country like Finland, the criminals have access to books and vocational education, the proportion of released prisoners who recommit a crime is low.
Secondly, the money for national defense, if not distributed wisely, can create many problems. Firstly, the money for ammunition or weaponry is already enormous and it will be larger if the cost of maintenance of equipment is taken into consideration as specialized personnel is required for this process. Secondly, this huge budget can create a loophole for embezzlement since it is usually sacrilegious to question the money spend on national defense. As a result, a substantial amount of money can be cut without reduce the country’s defensive power.
In conclusion, it is not advantageous to trade off the social benefits for national defense.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-06 | Dinosaur | 67 | view |
| 2021-05-15 | Sumit mirdha | 61 | view |
- A government has a responsibility to its citizens to ensure their safety Therefore some people think that the government should increase spending on defense but spend less on social benefits To what extent do you agree 67
- Some people believe that the government should pay full courses fees for students who want to study in universities Do you agree or disagree with this statement 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 141, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ease the budget on defense and decrease the spend on social welfare. I disagree with this...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 375, Rule ID: PHRASE_REPETITION[1]
Message: This phrase is duplicated. You should probably leave only 'staying at'.
Suggestion: staying at
...especially poor people, will be apt for staying at staying at home rather than going to a hospital fo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, well, while, as to, in conclusion, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 7.85571142285 191% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1687.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 322.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23913043478 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23607819155 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00861801142 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54347826087 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 533.7 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 2.52805611222 356% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.7350628657 49.4020404114 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.4375 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.125 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.875 7.06120827912 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114856198724 0.244688304435 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0493742120819 0.084324248473 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.094386054082 0.0667982634062 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103052843777 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0936002290038 0.056905535591 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.0946893788 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.