It is impossible to help all people in the world so governments should focus on people in their own countries. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Possibilities of a nation or organization to provide enough aids on global scale are so fragile that people are considering to withdraw investment on international supporting packages in order to focus more on domestic development. I completely object the idea for the following reasons.
On the one hand, leaders ‘hesitation over international aids provision for deprived nations is understandable. Firstly, governments support always meet obstacles in distributing packages to all underprivileged countries because of their excessive number. For example, developed countries may encounter difficulties in terms of transportation when sending food and medicines to third world countries in Africa where people are facing the threat of famine or contagions. Secondly, I believe leaders of country should prioritize the well-being of their citizens and stabilize their economy and politics before carrying out any acts of global assistance.
On the other hand, I still strongly believe that backing up as many poor regions as possible is of necessity regardless of the impractical achievement of providing a worldwide assistance. To begin with, in many underdeveloped countries, their authorities unfeasible to bear the burden of eradicating domestic poverty or crises due to, for example, terrorism, which invokes the attention of affluent nations. Also of a great significance is that this national act of charity could have a huge impact on individuals living in prosperous areas. If the government take actions to help people overseas, citizens of that country will idolize the idea of self-devotion toward a better world.
In conclusion, I truly believe the world leaders should lend their neighbors a hand to offer help to people in need on their doorstep.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-28 | IVANTRUONG | 73 | view |
| 2019-04-14 | lanhhoang | 56 | view |
| 2019-01-12 | Hau Nguyen | 78 | view |
| 2018-12-27 | quynhdieu | 78 | view |
| 2018-07-28 | Dongvo | 78 | view |
- The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999. 78
- Fresh water has always been a limited resource in some parts of the world. Today, however, growing worldwide demand has made this a global problem.What are the causes of the increased demand and what measure could governments and individuals take to respo 56
- In the future, it seems more difficult to live on the Earth. Some people think more money should be spent on researching other planet to live, such as Mars. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 89
- Some people choose to have their first child at an older age. What are the reasons? Do advantages outweigh disadvantages? 11
- People in community now could buy cheaper consumer goods. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? 11
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 409, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...okes the attention of affluent nations. Also of a great significance is that this na...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, third, well, for example, in conclusion, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1510.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 268.0 315.596192385 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.63432835821 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.308285635 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 176.041082164 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.626865671642 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 475.2 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0586432956 49.4020404114 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.272727273 106.682146367 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3636363636 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.5454545455 7.06120827912 178% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.21056827194 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0711983442343 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0710599464367 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136037432554 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0545370274743 0.056905535591 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 13.0946893788 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.67 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.07 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.