Some people say that economic growth is the only way to end hunger and poverty, while others say that economic growth is damaging the environment so it must be stopped. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
In today’s world, economic development has been the top priority in a multitude of countries as it is deemed to be the only way to eliminate hunger and poverty. However, others oppose that it needs to be stopped due to its environmental damages. From my point of view, I believe the growth of the economy should be sustainable to assist with dealing with the poor.
On the one hand, economic growth can help shake off poverty and enhance people's lives. Undoubtedly, the more developed the economy is, the more goods are produced, which is a precursor for higher job opportunities. As a result, people can work, earn money for themselves and live better off. Take the USA as an example, after the great economic growth in the 2000s, 70% of people from all strata of the society got away from poverty and could settle down with a decent life. Moreover, the government can improve infrastructure and services with more financial aid, from which the people will soon benefit.
On the other hand, the effects of higher goods production and focusing solely on the economy on the environment are adverse. Firstly, a myriad of materials are required to meet the needs of economic development, so people will exploit and damage the forest or the ground for that. Secondly industrial waste from factories along with other pollutants from the process of producing goods can exacerbate nature. Economy will grow at the expense of the loss of trees, fossil fuels and sustainable environment.
However, this problem does not mean the economic growth should be impeded but it should be made more environmentally-sound and effective.
In conclusion, the economic growth brings tangible benefits of eradicating poverty and it should be achieved with the care of the environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 320, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... better off. Take the USA as an example, after the great economic growth in the 2...
^^
Line 5, column 42, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'goods'' or 'good's'?
Suggestion: goods'; good's
...n the other hand, the effects of higher goods production and focusing solely on the e...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, in conclusion, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1483.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 293.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0614334471 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85962022116 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.566552901024 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 466.2 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.9908999804 49.4020404114 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.928571429 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9285714286 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.92857142857 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.247416802978 0.244688304435 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0844600368916 0.084324248473 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0606613888003 0.0667982634062 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145872041928 0.151304729494 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.036242565282 0.056905535591 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.4159519038 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.