There are different views about how governments should allocate public money. Some people believe that taxes should be spent more on illness prevention than medical treatment. However, I disagree this opinion to some extent. It is true that government should allocate a certain percentage of public money on future health promoting, but I believe that the insistence and efforts of current illness treating are equally, even more important.
There are several reasons why it is not suggested to reduce budget of disease treatment. First, the costs of some illness treatments and medical services is very expensive. Sometimes it is too expensive to be afforded for people without the government funding. For instance, modern equipment prices for cancer treatment are very high, and it would be impossible for poor people to access these devices for treatment and to pay by themselves. Furthermore, there have been an increasing new diseases that many people are now suffering as well as some birth defects which are hard to prevent, and it would be needed to invested in medical research to develop new medicine, vaccines and medical procedures related to these diseases to save more lives and cure more people.
On the other hand, I can quite understand why some people object that government continues to invest heavily in disease treatment. The main reason for this view is that promoting healthy lifestyle could be a relatively money-saving policy. Comparing with researching and developing on medical treatments and techniques, health advocacy by education or advertising is indeed cheaper, and effect-significant. It still has limitation on medical progressing if government only focuses on health lifestyle advocacy and compresses the budget for clinical treatment research.
In conclusion, I reaffirm my opinion that taxes should be spent on providing medical treatment in a proportion though the policy of providing healthy lifestyle is low cost by comparison.
- The chart below gives information on the percentage of British people giving money to charity by age range for the years 1990 and 2010.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 67
- The chart below gives information on the percentage of British people giving money to charity by age range for the years 1990 and 2010.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 61
- With the rise in the popularity of the internet newspapers will soon become the thing of the past To what extent do you agree or disagree 85
- Some people think it is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle in order to prevent illness than to spend it on the treatment for people who are already ill To what extent do you agree or disagree 72
- The charts below show the percentage of water used for different purposes in six areas of the world.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 41, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggested reducing'.
Suggestion: suggested reducing
...There are several reasons why it is not suggested to reduce budget of disease treatment. First, th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 96, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...duce budget of disease treatment. First, the costs of some illness treatments and...
^^
Line 3, column 491, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'disease'?
Suggestion: disease
...more, there have been an increasing new diseases that many people are now suffering as w...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, so, still, well, for instance, in conclusion, as well as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1671.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 307.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44299674267 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93574805512 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560260586319 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.2574347871 49.4020404114 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.357142857 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9285714286 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.92857142857 7.06120827912 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.276768876056 0.244688304435 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102525445638 0.084324248473 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0609758763038 0.0667982634062 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161005392543 0.151304729494 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0691432202513 0.056905535591 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 9.78957915832 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.