It is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle than to spend it on the treatment of people who are already ill.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
There has been a suggestion that the government should not allocate as much taxpayers’ money to remedy those who are already suffering from medical problems. Instead, it ought to be channeled to the promotion of a health-enhancing way of life. I opine that this idea is flawed. In fact, which are the money should go to primarily depends on the situation at a specific time as each measure has its own merits.
On the one hand, investing financial resources in boosting a lifestyle of good health is beneficial in the long run, thereby reducing huge costs for the healthcare sector. It means that when a young person leads a healthy life, they can avoid the risks of many life-threatening illnesses. For example, should a person not smoke or consume fast food, they can reduce the probabilities of diabetes, heart attack, and lung cancers. As a result, they do not need to visit hospitals or doctors regularly, and if they maintain this wholesome lifestyle towards old age, they save themselves and the government a great deal of money which can be distributed and used in other necessary areas.
Having said that, investments in aiding currently sick people should also be reasonable. It is obviously true that people’s unhealthy ways of life cost a country dearly every year, and it appears to be sensible that the government should intervene so as to ameliorate the problem. However, I believe that anyone can choose how they live their life on the condition that it does comply with the law. Another justification for this notion is that when they are still healthy and strong, they do contribute their labor to the country via taxes, so they should be eligible for the government’s support when they are in need. Therefore, any cuts in budgets for the treatment of those with current health problems would make no sense.
In summary, whilst diverting money to raising people’s awareness is of great benefit, it must not be done at the expense of people who are now sick and need monetary aids, notwithstanding costing the economy.
- Organized tours to remote areas and communities are increasingly popular Is it a positive or negative development for the local people and the environment 84
- Competitiveness is a positive quality for people in most society How does this quality affect each individual and is it a positive or negative trend 73
- Teleworking has been on the increase in recent years Do youy think this is positive and negative development 56
- It is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle than to spend it on the treatment of people who are already ill To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Some people believe that the responsibility for the protection of the environment is by a transnational organization rather than by each individual country To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 72, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...t the government should not allocate as much taxpayers’ money to remedy those who ar...
^^^^
Line 3, column 248, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...le that the government should intervene so as to ameliorate the problem. However, I beli...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, still, therefore, as to, for example, in fact, in summary, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 7.30460921844 219% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 36.0 24.0651302605 150% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1703.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 346.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92196531792 5.12529762239 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81791314658 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589595375723 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 522.9 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 5.43587174349 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.7235394168 49.4020404114 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.642857143 106.682146367 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7142857143 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.097654788191 0.244688304435 40% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0330521430939 0.084324248473 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0269558344519 0.0667982634062 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0675211137072 0.151304729494 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0192384045027 0.056905535591 34% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 50.2224549098 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.4159519038 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.