The range of technology available to people is increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Others think it has an opposite effect. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
When it comes to the influence of technology, there is no consensus on whether it is widening or tackling wealth disparity in modern society. In this essay, both sides, including my viewpoint on the negative effects, will be articulated.
It is understandable why some people agree with the idea that the gap between rich and poor individuals could be mitigated by technology. They often explain that the cost of accessing and using modern technological equipment or services is becoming more affordable than ever before, allowing the majority of the population, including the poor, to have equal chances of making business. Therefore, social mobility is more feasible nowadays than it was in the age of unpopularity of technology many decades ago, meaning the possibility for under-privileged citizens to accumulate more wealth is higher.
However, my argument about the negative side of the spectrum is that technology is actually worsening income inequality for several solid reasons. The reasoning about technology giving valuable opportunities to the poor might sound convincing, but it excludes the way of using technology. Impoverished people are more likely to be low-skilled and not highly illiterate, resulting in not having sufficient ability to apply technology in their work. High-income individuals, however, because of being better educated and having more technological skills, tend to earn more profits thanks to more effective utilization of technology. This difference could be exemplified by the internet, on which exorbitant business activities are typically established by those who are from affluent family and have received tertiary education on business-related fields from prestigious universities. For those reasons, technology should be seen as a significant culprit of wealth inequality in contemporary society.
In conclusion, although it is reasonable to state that technology could make positive contribution to wealth distribution nowadays, I strongly believe that it is doing harm to social inequality in economic terms.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-25 | fhu | 89 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Harpreet Singh Kooner | 56 | view |
| 2019-08-04 | smiles | 84 | view |
| 2019-05-11 | Muhammed_10 | 67 | view |
| 2019-01-26 | Inpu Nguyen | 73 | view |
- Some people could be naturally good leaders. Others believe that people can learn leadership skills. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 89
- Many young people now know more about international movie and pop stars than famous people in the history of their own country.What are the reasons? What can be done to make young people interested famous people in the history of their own country. 84
- Many people think that countries should import less food and produce more for their population. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 84
- The range of technology available to people is increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Others think it has an opposite effect. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 89
- Many people argue that living in horizontal city is the best, while others believe that living in vertical buildings is better. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, if, so, therefore, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1766.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 307.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.75244299674 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27180820994 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.615635179153 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 582.3 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 48.8518167523 49.4020404114 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.166666667 106.682146367 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5833333333 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 7.06120827912 66% => 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: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.120731882029 0.244688304435 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0465031218019 0.084324248473 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436196394041 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.062178483884 0.151304729494 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0392548269692 0.056905535591 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 13.0946893788 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 20.72 50.2224549098 41% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 7.44779559118 196% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.37 12.4159519038 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.07 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.78957915832 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.