There has always been considerable discussion in terms of the influence of technology on human beings. It is argued by some that the advent of technology contributes to increase the gap between social classes, I believe that technology is an ideal vehicle for people to get closer to each other.
On the one hand, I understand why some people are of the fervent conviction that technological devices widen the gap between rich and poor people. They argue that technological advances have led to the appearance of various luxurious products which are so costly that only the rich in the society are able to afford. Take supercars as a typical example, these cars are often equipped with upper-level performance engines and other state-of-the-art equipment. Also, they have to experience rigorous testing process about safety before delivery to customers, so they are too expensive in the market. It is impossible for poor people who live on small salary to buy this kind of cars which may cost them a fortune but many rich individuals buy exorbitant cars to separate them from society.
On the other hand, I believe that there do exist many technological inventions which reduce the difference between wealthy and poor people. The advancement of technology has brought many opportunities for most people from a variety of backgrounds to approach a range of technological products which are affordable in the market. It is exemplified by a high proportion of families in Vietnam who use air conditioners and washing machines on a daily basis. In the past, it was impossible for impoverished people to possess have these products which are limited in numbers and expensive. However, not only well-off households in cities but also rural families in the countryside can buy them to improve their living standards as they are not only diverse in size and quantity but also cheap.
In conclusion, there are some high-tech devices which are prohibitely expensive for poor people to buy, but I believe that many technological products are low-cost contribute to narrow the gap between rich and poor people.
Votes
Essay reference notes: This topic is refereed from another essay topic, developed by user: jchalana85
Essay Categories
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 744, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: diverse
...r living standards as they are not only diverse in size and quantity but also cheap. In conclu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, well, in conclusion, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1758.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 344.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11046511628 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94376719163 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514534883721 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 572.4 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => 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: 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: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 34.4788761332 49.4020404114 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.230769231 106.682146367 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4615384615 20.7667163134 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15384615385 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.248464234454 0.244688304435 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0950254488129 0.084324248473 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0866468908854 0.0667982634062 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181828859249 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0408466584859 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 50.2224549098 73% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.