The more money people have, the more they should contribute to charity
From many erudite thinkers' point of view, nowadays, with the development of humans’ modern society more and more people tend to earn more money and become wealthier than before in different corners of the world. Furthermore, in numerous circles of scholars and researchers, the debate surrounding how rich people spend their money has witnessed many controversies. Whereas some are inclined toward the opinion that the more money people have, they should contribute more to charity, on the other extreme of the rope, the opposite view also have its own proponents. While both sides take their own positions, from my vantage point, the second group carries more weight. In what's follow, I would like to address some conspicuous aspects to cogently corroborate my standpoint.
One of the most exquisite aspects of the current discussion which demands a keen contemplation is that there are lots of other areas in even societies which deserve to spend money on rather than charity. In other words, although it is definitely true that rich people of the society are responsible for the lower stratum of the society, it is less certain that by spending money on them, their problems will be tackled and their worries will be alleviated. So, instead of contributing money to the charity they can, for instance, builds new factories and recruit many poor people. In this way, the motivation of the lower class of the society as well as their self-confidence will be built up to make headways.
The second reason coming to my mind to substantiate and vindicate my standpoint concerned with this issue is that we are living in an age that most of the rich people in order to exempt from paying taxes they contribute to the charity in one way or another. In addition, there are lots of other people that in order to show off themselves, they spend money on charity. So, in this way, since they do not help by their heart, they may result in numerous ramifications. For example, this people which are usually the well-known people of the society, most of the people make them as role model and realize their behavior are good and it can replicate to other generation and as time goes by, the awe inspiring concept of the charity besmirch.
To put everything in a nutshell, a broad look over the main points and discussions reveals the fact that people especially rich ones should not contribute to the charity if they have more money since they can disburse their money to some other essential ways that are more beneficial for the society and also, as far as their incentive to spend money is not as clear as crystal, it may have some dire consequences for the society.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-15 | mrhj75 | 75 | view |
| 2022-08-09 | abusrddddd | 73 | view |
| 2022-08-09 | abusrddddd | 73 | view |
| 2022-06-19 | Rustin_Panda | 70 | view |
| 2021-08-05 | reeya kiran | 70 | view |
- Should a city try to preserve its old, historic building or destroy them and replace them with the modern buildings? 76
- tpo 42 60
- You are helping to select a leader for a student organization or club. Do you agree or disagree that a person’s honesty is the most important thing to consider in deciding whom to vote for?Use reasons and examples to support your position. 70
- Is it more important to be able to work with a group of people on a team or to work independently? Use reasons and specific examples to support your answer. 80
- You are helping to select a leader for a student organization or club Do you agree or disagree that a person s honesty is the most important thing to consider in deciding whom to vote for Use reasons and examples to support your position 72
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 678, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...he second group carries more weight. In whats follow, I would like to address some co...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 481, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...in numerous ramifications. For example, this people which are usually the well-known...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'furthermore', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'second', 'so', 'well', 'whereas', 'while', 'even so', 'for example', 'for instance', 'in addition', 'as well as', 'in other words']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.229083665339 0.229887763892 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.135458167331 0.158761421928 85% => OK
Adjectives: 0.105577689243 0.0866891130778 122% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0458167330677 0.046263068375 99% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0617529880478 0.0685040099705 90% => OK
Prepositions: 0.143426294821 0.118717715034 121% => OK
Participles: 0.0239043824701 0.0351676179071 68% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.63622119636 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0338645418327 0.0309702414327 109% => OK
Particles: 0.00398406374502 0.00188951952338 211% => OK
Determiners: 0.0896414342629 0.0887237588012 101% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0219123505976 0.0209618222197 105% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00996015936255 0.0139019557991 72% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2666.0 2387.08602151 112% => OK
No of words: 457.0 408.028673835 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.83369803063 5.86048508987 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62358717085 4.48200974243 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.304157549234 0.338922669872 90% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.234135667396 0.251872472559 93% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.157549234136 0.174417080927 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.111597374179 0.112833075102 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63622119636 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 212.727598566 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.498905908096 0.524397521467 95% => OK
Word variations: 56.954985494 59.2087087015 96% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 20.6684587814 68% => OK
Sentence length: 32.6428571429 20.5533526081 159% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.2468270684 48.84282405 185% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 190.428571429 120.699889404 158% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.6428571429 20.5533526081 159% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.21428571429 0.644075263715 189% => Less Discourse Markers wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.5376344086 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.54480286738 36% => OK
Readability: 56.0564238825 45.7405998639 123% => OK
Elegance: 1.63114754098 1.45489161554 112% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.513053899844 0.300154397459 171% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.136067196161 0.103427244359 132% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0769630946991 0.0752933317313 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.586445773918 0.497263757937 118% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.18768029799 0.151897553556 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.232187654631 0.114077575197 204% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.159273550167 0.0781384742642 204% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.504641805551 0.336927656856 150% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.068546576778 0.067059652881 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.404016915331 0.210909579961 192% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.118697596134 0.0618886996521 192% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8870967742 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.86379928315 52% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.91756272401 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 11.0 8.42114695341 131% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 2.4623655914 81% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.75985663082 36% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 13.6433691756 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.