Many of the products we buy nowadays break or wear out very quickly.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this for manufacturers and the public?
The longevity of current products, including items like food or clothing is notably shorter than that of their predecessors. While this shift can bring increased incomes for manufacturers and affordable prices for the public, the drawbacks are not negligible as well.
To begin with the advantages, making products with lower durability can be of great benefit to manufacturers. The quicker products are worn out, the sooner people may have to purchase them. For instance, the necessity of frequently replacing clothes due to their diminished durability amplifies manufacturers' sales volumes, consequently bolstering their revenues. As for the positives to the public, they are likely to enjoy low-cost products. More specifically, when manufacturers opt for shorter lifespans in their products, they often price them more competitively. Consequently, consumers are prompted to explore a wider array of products on a more frequent basis.
However advantageous this change can be, the erosion of consumer trust and limitation of quality options are the main drawbacks that come along. Regarding the former, less durable commodities can damage the trust between the sellers and consumers which can even make people stop buying from those shops. In restaurants, for instance, ingredients must be fresh all the time to ensure the safety; if purchased food products cannot stay longer, they may compromise the quality of the final dish. To avoid such situations, chefs may opt to switch suppliers. When it comes to the public, there are consumers who prioritize longevity over affordability. Such people may fail to find durable, high-quality options owing to the prevalence of short-lived products, which can lead to customer dissatisfaction.
In conclusion, although there are financial benefits for companies and affordability for consumers, the frequency of short-lived products may lead to a loss of consumer trust and dissatisfaction. Hence, striking a balance between affordability and quality remains imperative in the pursuit of sustainable consumption patterns
- Many manufactured food and drink products contain high levels of sugar which causes many health problems Sugary products should be made more expensive to encourage people to consume less sugar Do you agree or disagree 67
- In many countries fast food is becoming cheaper and more widely available Do the disadvantages of this outweigh the advantages 74
- The bar chart below shows the number of men and women attending various evening courses at an adult education centre in the year 2009 The pie chart gives information about the ages of these course participants 84
- Manufacturing instant noodles 78
- Traditional ideas from older people about the way to live and behave are not helpful to young people and their futures To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, well, while, as for, for instance, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1767.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 310.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.7 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19377809536 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590322580645 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 543.6 506.74238477 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.633645877 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.4375 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.375 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3125 7.06120827912 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.156186168921 0.244688304435 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0508620248749 0.084324248473 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0435304094104 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0979054440658 0.151304729494 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0301231659886 0.056905535591 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.78 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.62 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, well, while, as for, for instance, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1767.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 310.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.7 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19377809536 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590322580645 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 543.6 506.74238477 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.633645877 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.4375 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.375 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3125 7.06120827912 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.156186168921 0.244688304435 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0508620248749 0.084324248473 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0435304094104 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0979054440658 0.151304729494 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0301231659886 0.056905535591 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.78 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.62 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.