Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the protection of wild animals and that this money could be better spent on the human population. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
These days, some people advocate that a large amount of time and budget is allocated for wild breeds’ maintenance and that this fund, in a more superior way, should be invested in the human race. From my vantage point, I utterly appreciate the investment in advancing human life rather than protecting wild animals.
It is commonly disputed that wild animal conservation areas require an extremely colossal expenditure on running-cost and may bring counterproductivity. These sanctuaries, unwittingly, do not resemble the natural environment to facilitate animals’ adaptation and this leads them to bear no descendant blocking the probabilities for natural reproduction. Another adversity is that conserving wild creatures can neither minimize the loss of habitats nor preclude illegal over-poaching. Should we protect wildlife while unrestricted hunting takes place on a daily basis, the ecosystem will still become perished, and this, somewhat, renders our attempts pointless.
Conversely, it stands to reason that the government should offer proper subsidization for advancing people’s quality of life. The majority of people emphasize that developing natural-based medicine is the underlying prerequisite as wild animals are of the crucial substance for pharmaceutical inventions. However, what this outlook fails to consider is that medicinal animals will rapidly be on the verge of extinction if we keep exploiting them without any protective resolutions. In fact, unfortunately, maintaining biodiversity and improving people’s quality of life concurrently is deemed to be futile, thus giving prominence to social welfare still makes a priority.
In summary, I believe that substituting budgetary distribution to animal protection for humanity demands is a sustainable guarantee of mankind’s survival. Once social welfare is flourished, the ecosystem will also be recovered simultaneously.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-12-05 | ophongcute@gmail.com | 78 | view |
| 2023-12-03 | abid1 | 78 | view |
| 2023-10-04 | Afdalah Harris | 56 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | mynguyen001 | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-17 | Linhdung | 73 | view |
- Nowadays parents put too much pressure on their children to succeed Is this a negative or positive development 89
- Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the protection of wild animals and that this money could be better spent on the human population To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 95
- Many students now have the opportunity to study in other countries Studying abroad may bring some benefits to some students but it also has a significant number of disadvantages Discuss both sides of the argument and give your own opinion 89
- In the modern world more and more emphasis is being placed on acquisition of practical skills rather than knowledge from textbooks or other sources Discuss the benefits and drawbacks of this trend 84
- Some people say that the best way to improve public health is by increasing the number of sports facilities Others however say that this would have little effect on public health and that other measures are required Discuss both these views and give your 95
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, however, if, look, may, so, still, thus, while, in fact, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 41.998997996 62% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1637.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 274.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.97445255474 5.12529762239 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.42072837258 2.80592935109 122% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.678832116788 0.561755894193 121% => OK
syllable_count: 522.9 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.1966332001 49.4020404114 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.416666667 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8333333333 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213322279186 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0696668129742 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0462167496091 0.0667982634062 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12407949012 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406747212563 0.056905535591 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 50.2224549098 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.64 12.4159519038 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.78 8.58950901804 126% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.78957915832 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.