Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the protection of wild animals and that money is better spent on human population. To what extends do you agree or disagree.
There is a controversial situation about where the government need to allocate the expenditure on. In addition, many people believe that protecting wild animals from extinction charges authority an exorbitant budget. Hence, such a huge amount of money is better spent on population problem. Although I cannot deny that the priority in the field of human population is judicious in certain aspects, avoiding an alarming situation of wild animals is extremely erroneous.
On the other hand, I understand why people of fervent conviction argue that the population issue needed to be tackled as soon as possible. Firstly, there are many health- related problems which need the extreme assistance from the government’s budget.For instance, if the money occupied for pressing diseases such as Covid19 pandemic is insufficient, the higher rate of mortality would come as an expense. Moreover, the educational systems are also necessary in this contemporary society. Since the world has recently faced with overpopulation boom, the funding allocated in educational facilities have to be abundant in order to provide enough scholastic opportunities for a massive number of residents. If this enhancement happen, the world will become a more civilized environment filled with well-educated people.
However, the reasons described above do not mean government can ignore the pressing issue of wild animals and refute to allocate money on . To begin with, saving wild animals means saving people’ s life. Many wild species which hold the keys for medical breakthrough can treat ailments and health problems effectively. For example, it is leech that can mend people’s skin after plastic surgery. Moreover, the emergence of wild animals contributes largely to the balance of a giant ecosystem. It is widely believed that humans, animals, plants and other forms of life create a massive ecosystem and influence each other. If a certain specie is eradicated, it will negatively affect the animals which parasitized on it, disrupting the ecological balance of the whole universe.
Taking everything into consideration, although the budget spent on human population is worth and need to be priortised, the protection of wild animals is not only necessary but also demanded the budget from government.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-09-03 | quynhnhi280103 | 89 | view |
- The table and pie chart give information about population in Australia according to different nationalilites and areas 78
- Today large shopping center and supermarkets are more common than small local shops Is this a negative or positive development 84
- 16 The chart shows the percentage of boys and girls who participate in different sports activities in 2010 20
- In some cities people are choosing cars instead of bicylces while in other cities riding bike is replacing cars Why is this case Which development is better 89
- It is natural process for animal species to become extinct dinosaurs and dodos There is no reason for people to prevent them from this happening To what extend do you agree or disagree 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 332, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...Although I cannot deny that the priority in the field of human population is judi...
^^
Line 3, column 158, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun health seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much health', 'a good deal of health'.
Suggestion: much health; a good deal of health
...as soon as possible. Firstly, there are many health- related problems which need the extrem...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 251, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: For
...assistance from the government’s budget.For instance, if the money occupied for pre...
^^^
Line 4, column 138, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... animals and refute to allocate money on . To begin with, saving wild animals mean...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, moreover, so, well, for example, for instance, in addition, such as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 8.3376753507 276% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1943.0 1615.20841683 120% => OK
No of words: 353.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50424929178 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00937627399 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594900849858 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 624.6 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.4893300009 49.4020404114 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.294117647 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7647058824 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.70588235294 7.06120827912 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229621703774 0.244688304435 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0730656493684 0.084324248473 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0900445702754 0.0667982634062 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150932344181 0.151304729494 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.083277057936 0.056905535591 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.0946893788 114% => 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: 14.62 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.77 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 78.4519038076 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => 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.