"The desire of corporations to maximize profits creates conflict with the general welfare of the nation at large. "
From food items to electronic gadgets, corporations intend to maximise their profits in every possible way. While this may be beneficial to the organisation, it leads to negative impacts on the general welfare of its consumers and hence, the nation it is setup in as a whole.
Often, corporations try to maximise their profits by sorting to cheap quality items with the intention of selling them at the same price as before. This most commonly affects the health of the consumers across multiple dimensions depending on the product. Consider the example of Samsung Note 3 which made headlines in every newspaper for numerous phone bursting cases. After a point, people were not allowed in flights to carry this phone with them. Similarly, McDonald's, a food brand known for its highly quality and hygiene made news when the consumers faced health issues post the consumption of their food. So what is it that led to such gigantic impacts on the consumers of this brand? Was it mere carelessness? But had it been carelessness, it would have stopped after a few cases. Which leads to the assumption that it was a result of reduction in quality (obviously to maximise profit).
And, it's not just private corporations. Even governmental organisations lead to such cases for cost saving purpose. Have we not heard of bridge collapsing? Or for that matter buildings collapsing? Post investigation, the results are mostly that low quality cheap material was used that led to such mishaps. It is sad to see that innocent public becomes the victim of these evil ideas wherein no efforts are made to analyse the impact or the outcomes of such moves by these corporations.
In the end, I would like to suggest that corporations should try to come up with intelligent ideas for cost saving and a responsible person should be assigned an important task like this. For instance, when Pepsi Co. planned its cost saving project, instead of a reduction in the quality, they reduced a very negligible quantity of the drink from each container of Pepsi, unnoticeable by an individual. But as a whole, this small quantity made a huge difference as whole for the organisation. Such ideas do not have a negative impact on the consumers and the nation as a whole.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-20 | satyam63 | 83 | view |
| 2019-09-30 | Me Hahaha | 66 | view |
| 2019-09-08 | rikithreddy03 | 16 | view |
| 2019-06-23 | Aps1912 | 16 | view |
| 2019-06-11 | badri narayan | 16 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 253, Rule ID: CAN_SETUP[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is set up'?
Suggestion: is set up
... its consumers and hence, the nation it is setup in as a whole. Often, corporations t...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 790, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...t would have stopped after a few cases. Which leads to the assumption that it was a r...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, may, similarly, so, while, as for, for instance, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1867.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 380.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91315789474 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80022135057 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 215.323595506 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539473684211 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 588.6 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 51.7591228937 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.9047619048 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0952380952 23.4991977007 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.61904761905 5.21951772744 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0819532300874 0.243740707755 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0224169205589 0.0831039109588 27% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0369081710649 0.0758088955206 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0573938630282 0.150359130593 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0460083602881 0.0667264976115 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 14.1392134831 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.9 12.1639044944 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 100.480337079 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.