Some people say in order to prevent illness and disease, government should focus on reducing environmental pollution and housing problem. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
In contemporary world, the proliferation of novel and uncommon disease has emerged as a significant apprehensive for millions worldwide. Many advocate that the crux of tackling these health adversities hinges upon ameliorating environmental standards and rectifying housing dilemmas. However, know some people believe that government should focus on financial and working or education on country. I balance with these arguments and this essay will examine both sides before conclusion is drawn.
Admittedly, there are some government in favor of government should concentrate on education and financial. First, government subsidies for education is believed to equalize opportunities among young adolescents regardless of their family background and created more kind of jobs.
This financial support, presumably, tends not only to increase the overall study enrollment rate of lower-income people but also to mitigate their feeling of inferiority, which eventually promotes an egalitarian society. Second, support on education and financial would probably result in a greater supply of highly qualified workers, which benefits society in the long run. In fact, it is acknowledged that skilled and knowledgeable that skilled and knowledgeable human capital is imperative to foster economic growth and technological in any nations.
Nevertheless, the resultant problem would be far more if the government just focus on the life not the environmental pollution and housing. First, just focus on education would likely correspond with a tremendous environment on a country and financial. Generating no income from environmental product because the government don’t care about pollution, company could become over-reliant on the state budget for funding, meaning that there would be less input to develop other important areas such as healthcare systems and transport infrastructure. Second, government just focus on other things would tempt many young people including those who are not protect government including those who are not research about the important of pollution or show no interest in environment pursuits, thereby adding great burdens for government and company staff and potentially wasting time that these young people could have spent pursuing more protect environment. It, instead, would be a more environmental pollution if the resources were focused on support the housing and the important the problems.
In conclusion, despite the disadvantages of problem people need to know more about that problem and becoming a better life in the future.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-23 | Trần Ánh Vy | 78 | view |
- The bar chart show the number of visit to community website in first year and second years Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features have relevant 67
- The maps illustrated about the coastal land develops to a coastal park before development and after development Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Some people believe that no one should do the same job for all their working life Others argue that doing the same job brings advantages for individuals companies and society Discuss both views and give your opinion 84
- Some people believe that children should be taught about recycling and avoiding waste at home while others believe children should learn this at school Discuss both views 56
- Some people think that art such as painting and music does not directly improve quality of people s life so government should spend money on other areas To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 138, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun advocate seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many advocates'.
Suggestion: Many advocates
...nt apprehensive for millions worldwide. Many advocate that the crux of tackling these health ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 293, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nd rectifying housing dilemmas. However, know some people believe that government...
^^
Line 1, column 399, Rule ID: EN_GB_SIMPLE_REPLACE
Message: I is a common American expression, in British English it is more common to use: I
Suggestion: I
...al and working or education on country. I balance with these arguments and this e...
^
Line 2, column 13, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[5]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'there are some governments'?
Suggestion: there are some governments
...efore conclusion is drawn. Admittedly, there are some government in favor of government should concentra...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 652, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'protected'.
Suggestion: protected
...oung people including those who are not protect government including those who are not ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 699, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'researched'.
Suggestion: researched
... government including those who are not research about the important of pollution or sho...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, in conclusion, in fact, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 10.4138276553 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 8.3376753507 288% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2190.0 1615.20841683 136% => OK
No of words: 378.0 315.596192385 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.79365079365 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09823036298 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 176.041082164 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568783068783 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 683.1 506.74238477 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 79.2695541947 49.4020404114 160% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.0 106.682146367 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2 20.7667163134 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.46666666667 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.01903807615 120% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.206413399776 0.244688304435 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0725061905418 0.084324248473 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.065051950021 0.0667982634062 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103138554667 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0519790711873 0.056905535591 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 13.0946893788 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 50.2224549098 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.6 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.76 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 78.4519038076 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.