Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Governments should spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams.
How did the governmental financial funding for the arts more influence than supporting athletics events to develop a society even the consequences are not directly visible, such as economic growth and the reducing to the unemployment? The effectiveness of the arts, in fact, would develop broadly among entire perspectives of society from individuals’ awareness to diversified social ecology with a copious texture of communities that have a significant value. It is fair to say that the governments' funding for the arts would be a profitable investment to whatever individuals or communities. In other words, it would have immediate advantages to each corner of society instead of producing a single outcome as athletic events do. There are two reasons written down below.
To start with, it would broaden citizens’ awareness to optimise their behaviours and become civilised, further shaping the society toward more enlightened. In early 2018, Oxford University published a study report on the association between the arts’ government-funded infrastructures and the level of civilisation of a community. It indicated the fact that a neighbourhood which has a more significant amount of funds to construct relevant institutions, galleries, and events, result in the more harmonious balance of communicating among diverse social classes and guide the more enlightened attitudes about conflicted problems like gender, race, and multiple cultures blending. One of the notable cases mentioned in the study is known as Superkilen Park project in Denmark designed by the arts group Superflex. Denmark government intended to improve the tensive presence of the social classes’ gaps and conflicts through an art urban design project including a long-line park, several public art spaces, art fairs, and so on. Therefore, through the art education from the project, the residents from various races and groups have learnt how to artistic express their voices and genuinely understand the others’ appeals, especially cultivating their awareness and behaviours to autonomy their community better. The investigation table illustrated in the study showed that the project had several apparent improvements for local inhabitants' daily life at an extent, like the reducing rate of crimes (such as the conflict between different groups), the enriching kind of assortments of local business, the increasing index of literacy and the level of democracy, and so on. As speculation of society, a famous theory believed that the cognition level of citizens determines the shape and texture (the civilised rank) of a city and decide which a path that a city would be at the future. So, sponsoring the arts is a brilliant decision for governments and would not cause any harm.
Furthermore, even the outcome of the government-funded athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic fairs could help governments to deliver the economic prosperities sooner compare with investing the arts. However, it is an endless money-consuming vortex that governments not only have to build a vast number of sports infrastructures and must feed various sports teams. Moreover, the increased scale and rate of crime during sports’ fairs would bring a cascade of negative results and burdens for societies. It is apparent a worthless loss for governments and individuals, whether the sport-economy is profitable.
As a sum up, for government to sustainably develop a society, funding the arts is more vital than sponsoring the athletics. Therefore, I approve the agreement that governments should spend more money on the arts instead of sports.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-21 | Take | 70 | view |
| 2023-05-20 | slliland | 90 | view |
| 2023-05-06 | waliwaliwa | 85 | view |
| 2023-02-12 | redark777 | 75 | view |
| 2023-02-11 | Ruuluu9073 | 70 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In the past people ate food that was better for their health than they do today. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- TPO-52#LECTUREHumans have long been fascinated by elephants, the largest land animal in the modern world. Social animals that live in herds, elephants are native to both Africa and Asia. Their large ears, long trunk, and long lifespan have made elephants 78
- TPO-53#LECTUREMany countries require cigarette smokers to pay particularly high taxes on their purchases of cigarettes; similar taxes are being considered for unhealthy foods. The policy of imposing high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy products ha 80
- TPO-46 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?The opinions of celebrities, such as famous entertainers and athletes, are more important to younger people than they are to older people.Use specific reasons and exam 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In the past people ate food that was better for their health than they do today. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 275, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... The effectiveness of the arts, in fact, would develop broadly among entire persp...
^^
Line 3, column 2004, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...vernments and would not cause any harm. Furthermore, even the outcome of the gov...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, in fact, kind of, such as, in other words, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 15.1003584229 73% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 43.0788530466 44% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 52.1666666667 140% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.0752688172 198% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3083.0 1977.66487455 156% => OK
No of words: 554.0 407.700716846 136% => OK
Chars per words: 5.56498194946 4.8611393121 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85151570047 4.48103885553 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2527761966 2.67179642975 122% => OK
Unique words: 301.0 212.727598566 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543321299639 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 964.8 618.680645161 156% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.1344086022 134% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 80.5578053326 48.9658058833 165% => OK
Chars per sentence: 154.15 100.406767564 154% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7 20.6045352989 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.35 5.45110844103 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234847401198 0.236089414692 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0707343829297 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0679593151908 0.0737576698707 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162925115817 0.150856017488 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0600587791332 0.0645574589148 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.6 11.7677419355 158% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 58.1214874552 61% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 6.10430107527 213% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.1575268817 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.26 10.9000537634 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.91 8.01818996416 124% => OK
difficult_words: 173.0 86.8835125448 199% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 10.002688172 165% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.0537634409 127% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.