Some professionals earn a handsome amount of money per month while others make very little. Many people believe that it is favorable for the country but others are of the opinion that there should be a limit on the amount of salary one can take from workplace. If government exercises control over the monetary incentives availed by every individual, it will promote equality but take away personal liberty, making it unfair to those who work harder than others.
If maximum wages are defined, it is easier to generate an economy based on equality. In this economic model, the pay gap is negligible and it leads to elimination of class system in the society. The concept of rich and poor is minimal and less privileged fractions of society do not become a victim of unequal distribution of wealth.This also results in formation of a balanced society, devoid of resentment and prejudices. For example, in Scandinavian countries, the maximum salary limit is 2500 dollars per month so, no one makes extraordinary amount of money at the end of month. Research shows that class system is non-existent in these countries and people do not suffer from inferiority complexes. Moreover, ensuring controlled earning can also discourage materialism in the country and produce empathetic people.
On the other hand, those who earn considerably high salaries at the end of the month often have professional degrees, which they have bagged after years of academic struggles. They also work longer hours and their job requires high level of expertise. So, paying them equal to those who are less qualified or have easy work hours is unfair to these high functioning individuals. Furthermore, everyone has a right to make a living according to the amount of work they put in so, limiting their salaries will be an attack on their personal liberties. In US, for instance, a doctor works sixteen hours a day while for a plumber, the mandatory work time limit is only eight hours. So, if both get paid with negligible pay gap, it would be significantly unfair to doctor, who has studied for many years to gain this level of expertise and works for double amount of time.
To conclude, putting a limit on earning of wealth, can lead to an economically equal society but it will come at the cost of elimination of basic rights like liberty to earn. Therefore, everyone should be allowed to earn money according to his academic abilities and job requirements because it is extremely unfair to generate equality by sacrificing individual rights.
- technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in the world today. In the not too distant future, technology will completely replace the teacher in the classroom. Do you agree or disagree with this statement ? 56
- The average standard of people's health is likely to be lower in the future than it is now.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. 84
- The bar chart shows the number of times per week (in 1000s), over five weeks, that three computer packages were downloaded from the internet.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- The graph below shows the quantities of goods transported in the UK between 1974 and 2002 by four different modes of transport.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The diagram below shows how the water cycle works. 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 334, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...ictim of unequal distribution of wealth.This also results in formation of a balanced...
^^^^
Line 2, column 821, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... country and produce empathetic people. On the other hand, those who earn consid...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, if, moreover, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 41.998997996 143% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2103.0 1615.20841683 130% => OK
No of words: 423.0 315.596192385 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97163120567 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53508145475 4.20363070211 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79362413327 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 176.041082164 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536643026005 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 687.6 506.74238477 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.6126390366 49.4020404114 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.705882353 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8823529412 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.11764705882 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.251154020445 0.244688304435 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0754763727835 0.084324248473 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0685245199828 0.0667982634062 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15569186955 0.151304729494 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0682078393247 0.056905535591 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.4159519038 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.