More and more people want to buy clothes, cars, and other products from well-known brands. What are the reasons? Do you think it is a positive or negative trend?
Recent decades have witnessed the mounting preference of consumers for products from famous brands. From my perspective, I espouse the notion that this phenomenon is incontrovertibly unfavorable and discuss underlying causative factors associated with it in this essay.
On the one hand, there are several rationales why big brands' goods have gained popularity. The leading culprit behind this phenomenon is to show off owners' wealth, prestige, and personal image. Indubitably, because high-end brands usually advertise their products with well-known celebrities and glamorous representatives, numerous consumers believe that luxurious and extravagant personal possessions can embellish their appearances, proportionally reflecting owners' social status and self-esteem. As a result, they are inclined to purchase these large brand goods regardless of the exorbitantly expensive cost.
On the other hand, the increasing prevalence of famous brands' products is incontrovertibly unfavorable. One of the first significant negatives is to put a heavy burden on individuals' financial resources. Irrefutably, high-end products are frequently prohibitively exorbitant; therefore, financially precarious consumers that have the desire to purchase these luxurious and deluxe goods would likely have no alternative but to allocate a considerable proportion of their disposable income to afford these extravagant ones. As a result, this will potentially heighten consumers' severe monetary pressures. Another tangible negative is that this tendency would increase social inequality between the prosperous and the impoverished. No doubt, a volume of people these days evaluate others through their appearances, clothes, and other ornaments; therefore, in many cases, while affluent individuals are typically treated in a privileged fashion, economically disadvantaged people would likely become victims of inequitable treatment and discrimination. Consequently, this would elevate the discrepancy among social classes.
In conclusion, the increasing popularity of renowned brands has its roots in owners' desire to show their social status and personal image. I espouse the notion that this phenomenon engenders low-income consumers' elevated financial burdens and the widening gap between affluent individuals and impoverished ones.
- The use of social media is replacing face to face interaction between many people in society Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 89
- Nowadays more and more people use online shopping Some people think it is a good development To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- The maps below show the changes that have taken place at Forton Valley City from 2000 to 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in an European country betwwwn 1999 to 2004 78
- The maps below show a beachfront area in Australia in 1950 and today 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 323, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lebrities and glamorous representatives, numerous consumers believe that luxuriou...
^^
Line 3, column 918, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a privileged fashion" with adverb for "privileged"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...luent individuals are typically treated in a privileged fashion, economically disadvantaged people woul...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, if, so, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, no doubt, as a result, in many cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2005.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 318.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 6.30503144654 5.12529762239 123% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29765077185 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584905660377 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 642.6 506.74238477 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.0 1.60771543086 124% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => 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: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.8133637269 49.4020404114 172% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.666666667 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.53333333333 7.06120827912 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => 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: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105075224932 0.244688304435 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0357450479355 0.084324248473 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0333356823047 0.0667982634062 50% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0603844750688 0.151304729494 40% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0262696478495 0.056905535591 46% => 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: 18.9 13.0946893788 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 16.32 50.2224549098 32% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 11.3001002004 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 19.32 12.4159519038 156% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.69 8.58950901804 124% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 78.4519038076 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.