In this contemporary society, it is a general belief that allocating financial resources on global assistance is not advised when there is still the impoverished people in the country. From my perspective, I partly agree with this statement followed with some explanations.
On the one hand, there are many reasons why the authorities can assist international nations. First and foremost, this can help advertise and spread out the positive image of the country, which can promote robust relationship between each nation. To illustrate, Russia and Cuba have provided a bounty of supplies and food for Vietnam during the ancient war, resulting in stable communication. Additionally spending budget on global support can also create equal development opportunities between the prosperous nations and the underprivileged nations. For example, some governments from affluent powerhouse have humanity lifestyle and they want to contribute something helpful to developing countries. Hence, they make a decision to support the impoverished in order to make this world develop and rise together.
On the other hand, despite the above mentioned, positive aspects of global aid, there are numerous factors why national support should be prioritized. Initially, not only this can not only help to decline the proportion of the disadvantaged, but also rise citizens standard of living. As a result, the country will develop comprehensively, be more prosperous and civilized as well. On top of that, one point worth noting is that investing financial resources in one's own country can lead to the reduction in crime rates and increase security. More specifically, if a national head allocates their budget on various sectors including education or health, this will definitely progress the knowledge and working levels of residents. Therefore, it promotes the social mobility from lower class to upper class.
Taking everything into consideration, this reinforces my point of new that both spending financial resonances on global aid or national support are all advantageous in their own way. I honestly hope that the government can choose compatible way, depending on their situations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 394, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Additionally,
...war, resulting in stable communication. Additionally spending budget on global support can a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, honestly, if, so, still, therefore, well, for example, as a result, on the other hand, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1851.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 332.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57530120482 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.2685907696 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10095737444 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611445783133 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 585.9 506.74238477 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.0238094009 49.4020404114 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.6875 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.75 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.875 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.107203985516 0.244688304435 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0327520459363 0.084324248473 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.026622959519 0.0667982634062 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0695933754217 0.151304729494 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0232369290729 0.056905535591 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 50.2224549098 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.86 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 78.4519038076 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.