People can solve important problems by themselves or by their families; thus, it is almost not necessary to refer to the government.
In the past, people solved their problems between family and themselves. As time passes, by emerging leaders in the small societies, leaders had the power to intermediate between people and helped them solve their difficulties. After that, governments have established institutes regarding helping people in dissolve their problems. Contrary to established beliefs that referring to the government when people face with problems is unnecessary, I am of the opinion that government’s recommendations can be productive in solving people’s problems. Giving solution by family based on bias and being valid of government’s helping are the main reasons why I hold this point of view.
The first point worth mentioning would be that sometimes having bias pose an obstacle to finding a solution for the problems. In other words, if people refer the family to take their ideas, the family likely will give their opinion with prejudice instead of logical with justice. Consequently, the right solution not only will find but also sometimes problem become more hard and complex. A prime example from my family’s experience may shed some light on this point. Five years ago, my brother and his wife had a problem. They decided to speak with families instead of going the family counselor. The problem was about buying a new house, my brother wanted to be close to his family and his wife desired to be near to her family. Nevertheless, the family not only could not solve the problem but also reinforced their problem because of the prejudice.
There is also a more subtle point we must consider. The government has trained some people as an expert in this field. Therefore, they can help people more beneficial and give them many solutions. In the other hand, these institutes related to the government do their job legal and this point is ensured people that solutions are valid and they are in support of the law. For instance, three years ago my uncle and her neighborhood had a disagreement about a wall shared between their houses. They need a lawful solution to solve this problem because their knowledge and power were not enough to take on the problem. As a result, they went an institute dependent to the government and finally they could reach a result and agreement on this issue.
All in all, if all the factors contemplated we can reach this conclusion that because government’s recommendations are based on justice and legal; hence, people rely them and government play vital role in dissolving the people’s difficulties.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-03-25 | sam0506 | 83 | view |
| 2019-08-04 | javadsafari | 76 | view |
| 2019-02-01 | BobZhu | 83 | view |
| 2018-12-07 | shivaaaa | 61 | view |
| 2019-09-16 | javadsafari | 76 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, hence, if, may, nevertheless, regarding, so, therefore, for instance, as a result, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.0752688172 198% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2149.0 1977.66487455 109% => OK
No of words: 418.0 407.700716846 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14114832536 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52162009685 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93801820326 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 212.727598566 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502392344498 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 660.6 618.680645161 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.994623655914 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.612036427 48.9658058833 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.333333333 100.406767564 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9047619048 20.6045352989 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.57142857143 5.45110844103 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 3.85842293907 285% => Less 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: 0.206411129138 0.236089414692 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0729464818975 0.076458572812 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0704879884709 0.0737576698707 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13388861123 0.150856017488 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524939510233 0.0645574589148 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 11.7677419355 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 10.9000537634 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 86.8835125448 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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 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: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.