Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is iniquitous. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
In these days of the millennium, players of sports are treated as celebrities in terms of their pay package. This has sparked a heated argument on whether it is justifiable or biased. However, in my opinion, athletes should be paid lucratively as their health is on a threat but other professions too should also be given priorities.
The prime factor behind paying huge salaries to sports person is putting their lives at risks. To be more precise, this profession demands rigorous training and an ability to perform consistently well at speed, under fatigue and pressure conditions in a competition environment. This can cause physical or mental injury which can be detrimental to their lives. For instance, in a recent survey, it was discussed that frequent head blows can cause injury to the brain that can lead to depression, memory loss or dementia. Therefore, an attractive package is fair compensation to their countless energy and the huge health risk.
On the other hand, paying enormous salaries to sports person can create disparity among other professions which can lead to a shortage of these expertises. To elaborate more, professions such as doctors, teachers leave no stone unturned in making the world a better planet to reside. They too undergo a gruelling training and internship to hone their skills. Doctors work day in day out in keeping their patients' health. Similarly, teachers work tirelessly in moulding their students’ behaviour to make them civilized citizens. Hence, to avoid paucity of skills, these professions should not be overlooked in terms of payment.
In conclusion, athletes sacrifice a lot in terms of their health so they are paid excessively which is just; however, other occupations should also be valued and compensated appropriately.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-04 | happyhappy | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-12 | Sadrarouhi | 78 | view |
| 2019-12-10 | morbymuku | 78 | view |
| 2019-10-02 | ngannguyen | 56 | view |
| 2019-09-30 | WIWI UMAR | 61 | view |
- The diagrams below show the life cycle of a cotton T-shirt.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- movie making budget 11
- PIE CHART ON DIFFERENT EXPENDITURES ON MOVIE 78
- Some people think spending on arts is a waste of money rather than a budget should be diverted to other public services. Do you agree or disagree? 78
- expenditure on a movie-making process. 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, look, similarly, so, therefore, well, for instance, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1514.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 286.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29370629371 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93088761393 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590909090909 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.158140916 49.4020404114 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.933333333 106.682146367 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0666666667 20.7667163134 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.26666666667 7.06120827912 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121012237069 0.244688304435 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0414141341942 0.084324248473 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0412019134597 0.0667982634062 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0757199465234 0.151304729494 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.023477905268 0.056905535591 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.