One of the major problems facing the world today is the growing number of refugees. The developed nations in the world should tackle this problem by taking more refugees.
The recent political unrest, war and the rise of a few terrorist groups have made many people become refugees and this is a global problem. As an immediate solution, many express their view that rich countries should allow more evacuees to enter their border to reduce the severity of this crisis. However, accepting a higher number of migrants by the developed countries is not a viable solution to this refugee crisis, in my opinion.
Worldwide refugees and their constant sufferings are often reported on TV. At a first look, it might seem that industrialised countries can easily solve this emergency and sufferings by allowing more refugee immigrants to enter their countries. In reality, this is certainly not an easy solution. If we only look at the few recent catastrophic events that the migrant refugees have caused, it would become clear why the governments in developed countries are unwavering to accept more people to their countries. Besides, historically, it is evident that only granting more refugees in other countries does not solve the problem, in some cases, it actually deteriorates it.
Due to the humanitarian reasons, developed countries should help destitute and needy people. It is no longer possible, unlike the past, to ignore what happens on the other side of the world. This is partly a moral issue and partly because it is in the self-economic interest of the industrialised countries. Considering this, a practical way of reducing the severity of this crisis would be to accept more refugees, particularly when it is caused by a natural disaster and civil war.
From a more practical point of view, mass immigrations would bring more negative effects. Solving the root cause of the outbreaks of refugees is a far better way than allowing them freely migrate to developed countries. On a practical level, homeless refugees are sometimes better off receiving aid in their homeland than suffering racism and begging on the streets in a country where they cannot speak the language.
To conclude, affluent countries should take refugees but only in extreme cases and should focus on solving the primary reason behind the refugee issue. Sometimes funds and aids for refugees in their local area are far more beneficial than accepting them as migrants and finally forcing them to beg on the street.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-03-01 | aria etemadi | 67 | view |
- Studying the English language in an English-speaking country is the best but not the only way to learn a language. 61
- Some people say that giving a smaller amount of money weekly to children will help them become more capable as they grow older Do you agree or disagree 79
- There have been many technological developments in the 20th century, for example in transport, telecommunications and health. What technological development do you think has been the most important? How has it changed people's lives? Have all the ch 78
- The cost of international travel is decreasing and tourism is increasing in many countries. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the rising trend of tourism for countries? 67
- Few people devote time to hobbies nowadays. Say why you think this is the case and what effect this has on the individual and society in general. 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, besides, but, finally, first, however, if, look, so, in my opinion, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1960.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 381.0 315.596192385 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14435695538 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76432409956 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53280839895 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 615.6 506.74238477 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.9115933553 49.4020404114 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.294117647 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4117647059 20.7667163134 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.35294117647 7.06120827912 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
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: 0.165903146573 0.244688304435 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0539406179248 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0314472134606 0.0667982634062 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0950199256291 0.151304729494 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0433387300263 0.056905535591 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.