In times of economic crisis, in which field do you think the government can cut financial support?
1. Art
2. Scientific research
3. Parks and public gardens
Economic crisis has been occurring periodically in the Western world for a hundred of years, since the Great Depression in the last century. When crisis is coming, government always have to cut financial support for some fields, due to the shrunken tax income. If I were governor, I’d like to withdraw fund from art or parks and public gardens, but never form scientific research.
Cutting scientific investment is definitely the last option to be considered. On the contrary, every wise man knows for certain that more fund should be distributed to scientific research during economic crisis. Scientific breakthrough and technological revolution is entitled the most powerful engine for economic prosperity. History is replete with evidence to demonstrate this point. If it were not for the invention of steam engine, we would still use wagons as main method of transportation today. As a result, long-distance trade would be every slow and inefficient, which apparently has a negative effect on economy. If it were not for the large-scale application of electricity, we would still use candles for illumination. Without the assistance of light bulb, available working time for human would be limited within the daytime. How can you expect us to go through economic crisis, but do not provide us enough time to work? According to history, scientific research is definitely the most promising field to invest in times of economic crisis. Any significant breakthrough or revolutionary invention is adequate to lead us out of the crisis.
Compared with scientific research, art or parks and public gardens are relatively less critical to us, especially under the pressure of economic crisis. They can’t directly help us with the crisis, although they play a positive role in our lives. If the tight budget during crisis forces government to cut financial support in some fields, they are ideal options. The fund saved from them can be applied to realms, which is helpful for surviving a economic crisis, like education, science, infrastructure or other economic stimulation policies. Once the crisis passes, government can inject sufficient capital into art field or parks and public gardens again as an offset to the financial cut during crisis.
In summary, given the close relationship between scientific advancement and economic development, reducing scientific fund is always my last option. As for art or parks and public gardens, cutting their financial support are acceptable, if it is necessary.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: People who try to acquire more than one skill are more likely to become successful than people who just focus on one skill? 50
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship. 80
- The college years are the best time in a person’s life. Agree or disagree? 81
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Nowadays, children rely too much on the technology like computers, smart phones and video games for fun and entertainment while playing simpler toys or playing outside with friends would be better for 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Advice from older friends is more valuable than that from friends at the same age. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 452, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... realms, which is helpful for surviving a economic crisis, like education, scienc...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, but, if, so, still, as for, in summary, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.0286738351 36% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 43.0788530466 49% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 52.1666666667 92% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.0752688172 211% => Less nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2122.0 1977.66487455 107% => OK
No of words: 396.0 407.700716846 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35858585859 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46091344257 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9740699954 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545454545455 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 666.9 618.680645161 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.994623655914 201% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 3.51792114695 284% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.172498435 48.9658058833 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 101.047619048 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8571428571 20.6045352989 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.80952380952 5.45110844103 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.371605519152 0.236089414692 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102899670203 0.076458572812 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0803704321448 0.0737576698707 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.225066307816 0.150856017488 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.074811341375 0.0645574589148 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 11.7677419355 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 58.1214874552 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 10.9000537634 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 86.8835125448 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.