Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Preserving nature is important to the human race as we are one entity with mother earth. However, the statement intend to conserve any wilderness and even at the expense of economic development, which is too extreme, in my view.
To begin with, nations' primary objective is economic growth, in order to flourish and to improve the well-being of citizens. Without the bread and butter, society may face instability and people may be trapped in poverty. Thus, it would depend on if the nation interested in this environmental policy has achieved economic stability and especially, the unemployment rate at the target areas should be taken in to consideration. As human beings, no one would want to live in wilderness and indeed, the development of wilderness uplifted the well-being of people living in rural areas and make the commodities and services available to them.
In addition, the nation should rank the significance of the wilderness to be preserved and balance it with societal needs. Not all wilderness are cardinal to conservation, many may just have little environmental meaning. Thus, if the policy applies to any wilderness, the development of the area might be severely impeded. Indeed, the residents may prefer government plan the development of that area, such as malls, supermarkets, restaurants, as the wilderness may have caused them troubles like the fear of bears, wolves, and hygienic problems. Although we seek to keep as many as nature in their original states, we still have to put the people's needs first and generate a well-rounded decision.
This policy may be suitable for over-exploited cities, as the remaining wilderness is so scarce. And most cities have a copious of job opportunities and such policy would not affect people's employment. It would conserve the valuable greenness in the highrises made of glasses and steels. However, for rural areas, it would have a counter effect and thus increase the chasm in resources between urban and rural places.
In sum, I do not strongly support nations to pass laws to preserving any wilderness, as this would restrict the potential of areas that might be better off as residential or commercial areas. In addition, the economic condition is also primary concern for such policies.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-09-01 | batterylow_123 | 66 | view |
| 2024-07-09 | jiwon12 | 66 | view |
| 2024-01-10 | Tammy__kk | 83 | view |
| 2023-09-30 | rimpiG | 54 | view |
| 2023-05-19 | shubham1102 | 50 | view |
- Two years ago radio station WCQP in Rockville decided to increase the number of call in advice programs that it broadcast since that time its share of the radio audience in the Rockville listening area has increased significantly Given WCQP s recent succe 63
- Universities should require students to take courses only within those fields they are interested in studying Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and supporting 62
- The following appeared as part of an editorial in a weekly newsmagazine Historically most of this country s engineers have come from our universities recently however our university age population has begun to shrink and decreasing enrollments in our high 77
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state even if these areas could be developed for economic gain 50
- Over the past two years the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number 82
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 230, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ment, which is too extreme, in my view. To begin with, nations primary objective...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 173, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun may seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much may', 'a good deal of may'.
Suggestion: much may; a good deal of may
...ilderness are cardinal to conservation, many may just have little environmental meaning....
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 700, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t and generate a well-rounded decision. This policy may be suitable for over-exp...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, still, thus, well, in addition, such as, in my view, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1908.0 2235.4752809 85% => OK
No of words: 367.0 442.535393258 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19891008174 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37689890912 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95689168356 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.539509536785 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 704.065955056 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.3598830275 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.235294118 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5882352941 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.23529411765 5.21951772744 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.334012556462 0.243740707755 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0949307638099 0.0831039109588 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0666536255093 0.0758088955206 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175485149076 0.150359130593 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0619705837343 0.0667264976115 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.98 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.