Some countries invest in specialized sports facilities for top athletes but not for the average people.
Is this a positive or negative development?
Every nation desires to be at a top rank in various sports fields. To this aim, some governments focus on providing athletes with an ideal condition to grow without any concern. This policy has sparked a debate among societies. While some believe that all the opportunities and equipments should be allocated to elit athletes, I contend that this privilege could be extended to the general population since exclusivity of facilities would be more deterimental than beneficial.
On one hand, the proponents of investing budgets solely in the professional sports section assert that it can secure the national place in competitions. According to their mindset, a professional athlete should have no concern but the first place. In other words, with the provision of state-of-the-art infrastructure, athleths would not be deprived of training at the highest quality, and can ,therefore, present their best performance in the contests. Moreover, top-tier athletes need full financial support since most of them have no other income resources, and economical constrains can heavily influence their mental preparation.
On the other hand, critics argue that neglecting the average population can ba a harmful policy. I strongly admire this viewpoint as forcing all individuals to prevent a sedentary lifestyle can have a long-term beneficial result. Regarding the oligation of paying tax for all citizens, people deserve to have access to sports centers and facilities equally, and consider exercise as an indispensible part of their life. Doing this means by promoting the active life style, there would be a healthier society in the future, and less burden on the health care system. Another point is that when top quality facilities cater to everyone, talented individuals can be identified easier. Due to wider accessability to sports servises and increase in prevelance of doing exercise, people will discover their talents. Planning for the next athletic generation, consequently, would be more precise.
In conclusion, I confirm that although athletic investment can bring international proud and recognition, underrating sports facilities for the whole society can have too many risks and yield negative results. Since tax law is equitabale for everyone, all individuals, then, should take advantage of diong exercise without any limitations and difficulties to improve the quality of their life. In this way, betterment of public health would be achieved.
- Some believe it is more important for cities and towns to invest heavily in building large outdoor public spaces To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- Some countries import a large amount of food from other parts of the world To what extent is this a positive or negative trend 78
- In many countries people now wear western style dresses such as suits and jeans rather than traditional clothing Why is this Is this a positive or negative development 84
- Some argue that the expansion of multinational corporations and the phenomenon of globalization bring about beneficial results for all individuals Do you agree or disagree with this viewpoint 89
- In many countries people now wear western style dresses such as suits and jeans rather than traditional clothing Why is this Is this a positive or negative development 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 394, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...training at the highest quality, and can ,therefore, present their best performanc...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, if, moreover, regarding, so, then, therefore, while, as for, in conclusion, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 7.85571142285 242% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2091.0 1615.20841683 129% => OK
No of words: 377.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54641909814 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05657085007 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 176.041082164 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602122015915 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 655.2 506.74238477 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.8492238305 49.4020404114 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.166666667 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9444444444 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.241386905942 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0702454561612 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0468800727091 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146310659434 0.151304729494 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0508366916425 0.056905535591 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.91 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.12 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 78.4519038076 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.