In the contemporary era, there still exist some nations which are unable to fulfill the basic requirements for their citizens. People in some parts of the world lack the minimum needs like nutrition and literacy. Nonetheless, some people perceive that economically strong countries should come to the rescue of the suffering ones. Others on the contrary, harshly critique the former opinion as they comprehend that it is the government's responsibility to look after those people. I think that both discussions are mostly fair. This essay will examine both perceptions and in furtherance proposes the reasons for their validity.
First, let us put a light on the ideology of the rich aiding the poor. It is basic human nature to help the needy and based on the humanitarian grounds there lies a responsibility on the superior nations to help the inferior to evolve and see a bright future. This must be seen as a collective encroachment towards a better world where people do not die of hunger. For instance, some parts of Nigeria lack general medical assistance if other nations help it out children will not die due to malnutrition. Thus the above discussion is proven to be helpful.
Now, we will hurtle towards the latter opinion. The primary goal of any state's authorities is to ensure the wellbeing of its citizens. So the governing bodies of poor nations must pass statutes for the shoring up of the economy. They must sort out a variety of solutions which develop their lands and their people. Hence, these endeavors can help them overcome difficulties. For example, many poor nations are trying to increase tourism and manufacturing in order to boost the economy.
Summarizing the above information, there is an equal need for the respective nations and also the others in order to raise the living standards of people from economically backward countries. Thus, it can be concluded that both the given ideas are beneficial.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 426, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...inion as they comprehend that it is the governments responsibility to look after those peop...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 506, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ldren will not die due to malnutrition. Thus the above discussion is proven to be he...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, if, look, nonetheless, so, still, thus, well, for example, for instance, i think, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1621.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 321.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04984423676 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81625795986 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579439252336 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 510.3 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.9991425846 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.3157894737 106.682146367 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8947368421 20.7667163134 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15789473684 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.67935871743 173% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.193241078223 0.244688304435 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.049423993165 0.084324248473 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0464600413534 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111709888134 0.151304729494 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0296826677775 0.056905535591 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.0946893788 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 50.2224549098 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 78.4519038076 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.