The government's investment in arts, music and theatre is a waste of money. Governments should invest these funds in public services instead.
To what extent do you agree with this statement?
Throughout history, governments of different countries have always been trying to make steps bringing their nations to a lasting prosperity. In this sense an opinion exists that diverting the government's essential resources to such abstract concepts as arts instead of public services is a fundamental mistake. Although I am convinced that national money investments in the spiritual side of human nature are essential, developing sustainable infrastructure is of a paramount importance.
On the one hand, maintaining emotionally healthy population through recreational facilities including movie theatres, musical concerts and many others can be hardly overstated. Those places of rest assists people to release frequently suppressed emotions due to working environment where they are spending a majority of their weekdays. Many studies suggest that, for instance, with no sufficient mental relaxation, working productivity of most of the employees inevitably decreases over time. In other words, those seemingly non-material measures are highly valuable for overall public health.
On the other hand, comprehensive well-equipped public services as well as strongly developed transportation infrastructure are much more crucial for country’s inhabitants than any other possible areas of state's investment. Unless national police squads and medical emergency teams are supplied with technologically advanced equipment, preventions of crime and life savings are in potential threat. In the case of those gears' availability, individuals are much more likely to rely on those services which is, in its turn, improves overall emotional atmosphere of the citizens. In addition, adequate system of transportation positively influences almost every aspect of city life from commuting convenience to promptly arrival of fire department vehicles. Thus, these investments play a key role in countries' everyday routines and should constitute a main part of governments' funds.
In conclusion, I strongly support the state resources are directed to recreational areas, however, public services' capitalization is a significantly more rational decision.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-11 | SUSANNA PETROSYAN | 78 | view |
| 2023-05-08 | SUSANNA PETROSYAN | 84 | view |
| 2023-03-28 | butterflyluo | 61 | view |
| 2023-03-28 | butterflyluo | 61 | view |
| 2023-03-28 | butterflyluo | 56 | view |
- The best way to travel is travel in a group led by a tour guide To what extent do you agree or disagree 11
- Nowadays genetically modified food is widespread all over the world While proponents of GM crops ensure that these foods are safe for human consumption and help to increase food supplies others argue that their effects on health have not been studied long 73
- Some people say that music is a good way of bringing people of different cultures and ages together To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 73
- In education and employment some people work harder than others Why do some people work harder Is it always a good thing to work hard 78
- The government's investment in art, music and theatre is a waste of money. Governments should invest these funds in public services instead. 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 199, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[3]
Message: You should probably use 'assist'.
Suggestion: assist
...hardly overstated. Those places of rest assists people to release frequently suppressed...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, thus, well, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, as well as, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1848.0 1615.20841683 114% => OK
No of words: 304.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 6.07894736842 5.12529762239 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.28757181862 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.690789473684 0.561755894193 123% => OK
syllable_count: 583.2 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.5915947429 49.4020404114 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 142.153846154 106.682146367 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3846153846 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.92307692308 7.06120827912 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178607430909 0.244688304435 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0545007338471 0.084324248473 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059643447354 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0963996016642 0.151304729494 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0626836493944 0.056905535591 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.9 13.0946893788 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 22.75 50.2224549098 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.3001002004 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.28 12.4159519038 147% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.01 8.58950901804 128% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => 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.