No one can deny the fact that in the past few decades people’s inclination towards unhealthy food has been increased drastically. However, consuming unhealthy drinks and food packages can be very problematic and troublesome for people’s health. In this regard some people contend that rising taxation on these types of food iteams can be effective way to reduce consumption of it. On the other hand, there is a group of people who take it as an exaggeration, and think in opposite way. Certainly, from my vantage point, the latter view contains more weight. For the following paragraphs, I will delve into the most conspicuous reasons and examples justifying my stance.
The first exquisite reasons to be mentioned is that although increasing taxation on food and drinks might look effective theoritically, it will not have create distinct difference in reality. To be more specific, the government cannot raise taxation on a high scale, and in such a scenarios, each of food products would become little bit constlier. In fact, this increased cost is negligible for most of people. Besides that, young generation wounld not stop consuming it since they do not realize long-term negative consequences of consuming these foord items. To shed more light on this children are a particularly compelling example of this. It is unlikely that they are fully able to undrestand the effect of eating a lot of sugar and salts on their future health and wellbeing. Therefore, they continue buying these products despite the government tried to raise taxation. Ultimately, elevating taxation on a few food products is not a wise idea.
Another noteworthy point is that irrefutably human beings are living very sophisticated lifestyles these days in which they get very less time in the kitchen due to their higher work load at work place. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that they prefer such food choices which are easy to grab and consume. To exemplify, soft drinks which contain high sugar level is a great combination with other food dishes in daily life. Hence, it is less likely that people will discontiue their habit of having soft drinks. Admittedly, instead of increasing taxation, the governement can enhance awarness among people about consuming high sugary and salty foods and their effects on their health.
To recapitulate, from contemplating all remark, in spite of the fact that some people may not agree with my opinion, I stronly believe that the political party should not taxing people who are consuming food products which are not good for their health. This is because little cost difference would not make big difference in people’s lives, and it is hard to eliminate such foods and drinks in their lives since they have become very dependent on them.
- Traditions are defined as customary or established ways of doing things in a family community or culture Some people believe that it is important to follow traditions even when those traditions conflict with or are quite different from their own individua 90
- Some people like to keep a record of their own experiences by uploading pictures and other information to social networking sites Other people prefer not to create such records Which approach do you prefer and why Use specific reasons and examples to supp 73
- Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 73
- Reading passage An airship is a type of aircraft that flies using a very large balloon filled with a lighter than air gas Airships were an important means of air transportation before the 1940s but are little used today having been largely replaced by air 76
- TPO 20 integrated let it burn policy affects the parks in three ways first it damages the trees and vegetation in parks second it kills wildlife third it has a negative affect on the local economy 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 154, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'created'.
Suggestion: created
...fective theoritically, it will not have create distinct difference in reality. To be m...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 280, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a scenario' or simply 'scenarios'?
Suggestion: a scenario; scenarios
...e taxation on a high scale, and in such a scenarios, each of food products would become lit...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 328, Rule ID: LITTLE_BIT[1]
Message: Reduce redundancy by using 'little' or 'bit'.
Suggestion: little; bit
...ios, each of food products would become little bit constlier. In fact, this increased cost...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 397, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
..., this increased cost is negligible for most of people. Besides that, young generation wounld ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 585, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...hese foord items. To shed more light on this children are a particularly compelling ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'should' requires the base form of the verb: 'tax'
Suggestion: tax
...eve that the political party should not taxing people who are consuming food products ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, hence, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, well, in fact, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 52.1666666667 111% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.0752688172 223% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2328.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 456.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10526315789 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73919924922 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537280701754 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 714.6 618.680645161 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.94265232975 243% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.1662919391 48.9658058833 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.857142857 100.406767564 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7142857143 20.6045352989 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.09523809524 5.45110844103 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.5376344086 108% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.297227121302 0.236089414692 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.080400530463 0.076458572812 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0666689324451 0.0737576698707 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185586368216 0.150856017488 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0559839465386 0.0645574589148 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 11.7677419355 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 10.9000537634 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 86.8835125448 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.