In the given Issue prompt, the author considers that government has a greater responsibility of focusing on contemporary problems than trying to solve those that might happen in future. While this may be true to a certain extent, one cannot aver that government should totally ignore anticipated problems of the future and concentrate only on the immediate ones. The author’s argument is flawed and I mostly do not agree with what the author has stated.
Consider the problem of Global Warming. Is it an immediate problem or an anticipated problem of the future? Obviously, it is a problem of the future as we certainly don’t experience its effects now. But, maybe a hundred years from now, its effects might be disastrous. It can lead to a global ice caps meltdown, which may cause an estimated increase of about 6 to 12 inches in ocean water level. This, might not seem a dangerous, but it has the potential to flood thousands of kilometers of coastal areas. Just because it is a problem of the future doesn’t mean that we don’t have to worry about it now. Maybe in the future it reaches a level of noxiousness that is out of our capacity to control.
Consider another scenario in which the government has to decide whether they should employ their limited resources to build state-of-the-art buildings or for providing health care and educational benefits to its populace. It is logical to use the funds for providing health care and education to its citizens even though the results might not be immediately observable. This is because in the long run, it is the people that would drive the economy of the country rather than some fancy buildings. North Korea is a good example of what has been stated in the above example. The world knows the derelict state of North Korea’s economy. This is due to its leader Kim Jong Un, who is interested in equipping his country with Nuclear missiles and inculcating a sense of xenophobia among the citizens of North Korean peninsula rather than imparting education and health care.
Conversely, it is not important to always focus on anticipated problems of the future. A secure future is possible only if our present is safe. For instance, USA after the 9/11 attacks increased its military spending. Why? Terrorism is a problem of the present and it is bound to become a problem of the future if not tackled today. Thus, it is necessary for the government of any country to focus on the problems of the future of the present as well as the future up to a certain extent rather than only one of these.
In a nutshell, the author’s statement that governments need to focus only on immediate problems rather than anticipated problems of the future is skewed and false. Instead, governments need to take into account a holistic picture of all the problems that they face now and those that might become potential maladies in near future and decide the best strategy to tackle them.
- Issue: - In most professions and academic fields, imagination is more important than knowledge. 58
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future. 57
- “Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places” 74
- Governments should offer college and university education free of charge to all students.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In devel 92
- In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 176, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...trying to solve those that might happen in future. While this may be true to a certain ex...
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'conversely', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'thus', 'well', 'while', 'as to', 'for instance', 'as well as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.217162872154 0.240241500013 90% => OK
Verbs: 0.141856392294 0.157235817809 90% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0840630472855 0.0880659088768 95% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0630472854641 0.0497285424764 127% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0490367775832 0.0444667217837 110% => OK
Prepositions: 0.120840630473 0.12292977631 98% => OK
Participles: 0.0280210157618 0.0406280797675 69% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.76936075591 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0350262697023 0.030933414821 113% => OK
Particles: 0.00175131348511 0.0016655270985 105% => OK
Determiners: 0.113835376532 0.0997080785238 114% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0210157618214 0.0249443105267 84% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0192644483363 0.0148568991511 130% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2964.0 2732.02544248 108% => OK
No of words: 506.0 452.878318584 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.85770750988 6.0361032391 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7428307748 4.58838876751 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.361660079051 0.366273622748 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.262845849802 0.280924506359 94% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.179841897233 0.200843997647 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.122529644269 0.132149295362 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76936075591 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 219.290929204 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.48418972332 0.48968727796 99% => OK
Word variations: 56.5111070613 55.4138127331 102% => OK
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6194690265 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.24 23.380412469 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.8866572323 59.4972553346 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.56 141.124799967 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.24 23.380412469 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.44 0.674092028746 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.21349557522 19% => OK
Readability: 46.5245849802 51.4728631049 90% => OK
Elegance: 1.44137931034 1.64882698954 87% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.558384622477 0.391690518653 143% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.126481189011 0.123202303941 103% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0965814147852 0.077325440228 125% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.543215547097 0.547984918172 99% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.185805001549 0.149214159877 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.215774896752 0.161403998019 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.14505134342 0.0892212321368 163% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.4051392028 0.385218514788 105% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0652895091608 0.0692045440612 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.40108821452 0.275328986314 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0875284029234 0.0653680567796 134% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.4325221239 105% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.30420353982 207% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88274336283 61% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 7.22455752212 97% => OK
Negative topic words: 10.0 3.66592920354 273% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 13.5995575221 132% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.