The more money people have, the more they should give away to charity
It is generally agreed today that give money to poor people has played a pivotal role in reducing the poverty in society to prepare good life for all. Due to its paramount importance, there is a long- standing discussion among people that whether these days helping poor people is a value, but Some rich people are inclined toward the attitude that nowadays give their money to charities or not. Although, it is a little hard to reach a consensus on this issue, I am, to a great extent on the belief that, rich people should not give’s their money to charities. In the ensuing paragraphs, I will represent cursory glance at the most outstanding reasons.
To commence, one of the compelling reasons that justifies the thesis is that everyone who has extra money should help to creating jobs for poor people, instead give money to the charities edifies. To put it in general words, rich people can gather their money and construct a factory for poor people. Simply stated, the poor people could gain money by their work and be independent in financial issues. Needless to say, with this strategy, poverty will eliminate in cities or countries. To shed more light on the issue, according to a study conducted in my country recently reveals that the poverty decrease 20% in ten year by use this policy.
Alongside with the first reason elaborated above, another equally noteworthy in corroborating my stance is that the poor people should train to find a job by the money of rich people. To clarify, a Chinese proverb expresses that," give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime". To delineate, establishment of edifies to learn some specific job or specialize for poor people to find proper job with this expert. For instance, they can learn mechanical, electrical, cooking to forth and use these professions. However, what I mentioned above might not be overgeneralized to all contexts. Many people who had extra money prefer to give their money to charities rather than to help directly to poor people.
Drawing upon the reasons, although there are always some exceptions, which are excluded from the general rules. I do agree that rich people should not give's their money to charities. However, that was the story in a nutshell. In fact, there are a myriad of other reasons, challenging the above claim, which could be mentioned but are not embraced due to the dearth of time.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 266, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...g people that whether these days helping poor people is a value, but Some rich pe...
^^
Line 3, column 228, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...larify, a Chinese proverb expresses that,' give a man a fish and you feed him for...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 152, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'should' requires the base form of the verb: 'give'
Suggestion: give
... I do agree that rich people should not gives their money to charities. However, that...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 248, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'myriads'?
Suggestion: myriads
...ory in a nutshell. In fact, there are a myriad of other reasons, challenging the above...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, so, for instance, in fact, in general, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 43.0788530466 88% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 52.1666666667 119% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2029.0 1977.66487455 103% => OK
No of words: 422.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80805687204 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65925454482 2.67179642975 100% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514218009479 0.524837075471 98% => OK
syllable_count: 632.7 618.680645161 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7174566425 48.9658058833 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.789473684 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2105263158 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.26315789474 5.45110844103 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280004629232 0.236089414692 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0801941832924 0.076458572812 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0769215030339 0.0737576698707 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170445072964 0.150856017488 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0485839120524 0.0645574589148 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 58.1214874552 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 10.9000537634 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 86.8835125448 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 10.002688172 170% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.