Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.
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 developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
Civilization as we know it is running on borrowed time. Despite our best efforts to organize governments in cooperative agencies such as the United Nations or the European Union, nations are continuously struggling to fix the problems of today in order to better deal with the problems of tomorrow. A balance must be reached where governments can adequately align their policies and set priorities in order to address the problems the world is currently facing and later tackle and correctly solve the problems of the future. We know what the problems of the future are: climate change and overpopulation are ravaging our resources and soon there will be nothing left for the world to use in order to sustain life. However, if governments do not fix the immediate problems of today such as healthcare, poverty and access to education than we will not be able to fix the problems of tomorrow. It is a paradox, we are under strife and anxious because of what will come, however if we do not fix and correct what currently ravages government systems today than we will not achieve either goal.
The first, issue governments must tackle is poverty and inequality. There is an overwhelming amount of people who live under terrible circumstances worldwide. If governments do not cooperate and help create equality for all countries, then we cannot fix the problems of the future. Countries that are poor or suffer from inequality are unable to fix future problems such as climate change or surging numbers in their population. These masses of people significantly contribute to pollution indexes and negatively affect the environment due to their sheer numbers. Although a global stance on poverty could be disadvantageous in the sense that some countries might have to contribute some of their riches in order to sustain poorer countries, in the long run this strategy would be sustainable and cost effective once all countries reach a certain index of wealth.
Secondly, governments must contribute to educating all the masses. Without equal access to education people will continue to live in ignorance and ignore what will happen due to climate change and overcrowding. People must be made aware of their impact on the environment before we start massive campaigns to reduce climate change or these efforts will be costly and ineffective. Furthermore, education significantly contributes to reducing unwanted pregnancies, furthers people’s desire to expand their careers and will reduce the massive number of humans on the planet. Although worldwide education will be costly and difficult to implement, investing in people’s future is the same as investing in the planet’s future.
Finally, the world’s governmental agencies must address the most difficult task which is improving worldwide healthcare. Healthy populations will invest in their futures. This means that they will avoid polluting and unwanted pregnancies/STDs thereby reducing overcrowding. Healthcare access on a worldwide level is costly, difficult to implement in remote areas and one could argue that it is not feasible. However, new technologies such as cellphones allow for remote access to healthcare and make it cheaper to implement.
In conclusion, by fixing these key issues and problems of today the governments of the world could, in theory, tip the balance and finally address the issues of tomorrow. As previously mentioned fixing poverty/inequality, education and healthcare access is a daunting task. It is expensive, requires sacrifices from other nations, cooperation on a global scale and will be difficult to implement. However, in the long run, it will be a wise investment as it will be cost effective and will allow governments to cooperate and band together to fix the problems of the future which will most certainly become the problems of today very soon.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2020-01-19 | jason123 | 50 | view |
2020-01-18 | Himanshu Sharma | 66 | view |
2019-12-26 | tg763622253 | 58 | view |
2019-11-27 | mohan41 | 50 | view |
2019-11-26 | louisetse | 66 | view |
- Monarch Books should open a cafe in its store to attract more customers and better compete with Regal Books, which recently opened a cafe. Monarch, which has been in business at the same location for more than twenty years, has a large customer following 69
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain y 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 738, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... investing in the planet's future. Finally, the world's governmental a...
^^^^
Line 8, column 640, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...become the problems of today very soon.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 28.0 12.4196629213 225% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 30.0 14.8657303371 202% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 58.6224719101 133% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3262.0 2235.4752809 146% => OK
No of words: 615.0 442.535393258 139% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30406504065 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.97987886753 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03889519359 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 273.0 215.323595506 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.443902439024 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1026.0 704.065955056 146% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.1563255424 60.3974514979 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.461538462 118.986275619 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6538461538 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.73076923077 5.21951772744 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 5.13820224719 272% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.129864018287 0.243740707755 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0383784374774 0.0831039109588 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0507768855791 0.0758088955206 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.074027661956 0.150359130593 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0596730808498 0.0667264976115 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 100.480337079 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.