companies should provide sports facilities for local communities. To what extend do you agree?
Providing sports facilities for local communities is a topic that sparks debates. While some argue that companies should take on the responsibility of offering such amenities, others have reservations. This essay will discuss both perspectives and provide my own opinion.
On one hand, those in favor believe that companies should play an active role in promoting community health and well-being. By providing sports facilities, companies can encourage physical activity and help combat sedentary lifestyles. This can have numerous benefits, including reducing the risk of chronic diseases and improving mental well-being. Additionally, access to sports facilities can foster a sense of community and social cohesion, bringing people together through shared activities. For instance, a company-sponsored sports complex in a neighborhood could become a hub for recreational events and tournaments, promoting social interaction and community bonding.
On the other hand, there are valid concerns regarding the extent of responsibility that companies should assume. Critics argue that companies have a primary obligation to their shareholders and should focus on their core business activities. They argue that the provision of sports facilities should primarily fall under the purview of the government or local authorities, who are better equipped to handle community development initiatives. Moreover, allocating resources to build and maintain sports facilities might divert funds and attention from other pressing social issues.
In my opinion, while it is commendable for companies to contribute to the well-being of local communities, the provision of sports facilities should not be their sole responsibility. Rather, it should be a collaborative effort involving public and private sectors. Companies can contribute by partnering with local authorities or investing in existing community infrastructure. This way, the burden is shared, and resources can be allocated more efficiently to address various community needs.
In conclusion, the question of whether companies should provide sports facilities for local communities is complex. While there are benefits to promoting physical activity and community engagement, it is important to strike a balance and recognize the role of other stakeholders. Collaboration between companies, governments, and communities can lead to more sustainable and inclusive solutions for community development.
- What are advantages and disadvantages of living a number of different places during your childhood years 78
- Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal Some people however think that other types of progress are equally important for a country Discuss both views and give your own opinion 73
- Doctors should be responsible for educating their patients about how to improve their health To what extend do you agree or disagree 78
- Some people say that to prevent illness and disease governments should focus more on reducing environmental population and housing problems To what extend do you agree or disagree 89
- Doing an enjoyable activity with a child can be better for their overall skills development and creativity than reading To what extend do you agree 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 375, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'sport'.
Suggestion: sport
...tal well-being. Additionally, access to sports facilities can foster a sense of commun...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 16, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
...ious community needs. In conclusion, the question of whether companies should provide sports facilit...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, moreover, regarding, so, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 7.85571142285 216% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2113.0 1615.20841683 131% => OK
No of words: 348.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 6.07183908046 5.12529762239 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.28036970573 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 176.041082164 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551724137931 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 661.5 506.74238477 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.7499358776 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.210526316 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3157894737 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.68421052632 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.402733892458 0.244688304435 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136922703671 0.084324248473 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.116383574248 0.0667982634062 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253303752644 0.151304729494 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0391455991244 0.056905535591 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.83 50.2224549098 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.9 11.3001002004 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.93 12.4159519038 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 78.4519038076 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.