Some people feel that manufacturers and supermarkets have the responsibility to reduce the amount of packaging of goods. While others argue that customers should avoid buying goods with a lot of packaging. Discuss both views and give your opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Presently, in the era of cut throat competition, manufacturers present their products in excess packaging and supermarkets exhibit them to lure customers. However, excessive packaging is detrimental to the environment must be reduced. Whether the onus is on the supermarkets and manufacturers or should the customers say no to products with excess packaging has become a hot topic of the day. But, indeed, joint efforts at all level are needed to solve this problem.
To begin with, the major reason of such trend is the stereotype prevailing in public’s mind that relates product quality with packing. Since many people today equate quality with superior packaging, thus companies do not often take the risk of reducing it for fear of losing their market share. However, branded companies that are already established in the market can experiment with simple covering, without the fear of losing the popularity of their products. It would be a win-win situation for both – the manufacturer and the customer. For example, multinational companies like ‘Colgate’ can successfully give up expensive packaging of their toothpastes with no loss of sales.
Similarly, customers also have a role to play, by showing greater interest towards items in simple packing. To explain, excessive packaging only adds to the trash generated in the homes. By giving preference to materials with little or no packaging would motivate producers to pack products using the minimum packing and that too of biodegradable materials.
On the other hand, sometimes, the amount of packaging indicates the need to ensure the durability, safety and freshness of products. In other words packing prevents the fragile items from any possible damage. For instance, most instant foods are packed in several layers using expensive materials like aluminum foil and superior plastic, with the purpose of longer shelf life. In such cases, the packaging can be allowed.
In the light of all facts one can conclude that, most of packing is useless and just burden on customer’s pocket and detrimental for environment as well. Hence, manufacturers, supermarkets and customers have a collective role in reducing the amount of packaging of products.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-04 | quan quan | 73 | view |
| 2019-09-04 | macydo | 84 | view |
| 2019-08-18 | Mr.Strange | 73 | view |
| 2019-03-21 | Ania | 73 | view |
| 2018-12-03 | vishal sachdeva | 78 | view |
- Scientists and news media are presenting the evidences of climate change. Governments cannot be expected to solve this problem. It is the responsibility of individuals to change their lifestyle to prevent further damage. What are your views? 67
- As housing is a basic need for people government should provide free housing for everyone who can t afford it To what extend do you agree or disagree 78
- You are about to start social meetings in a particular area where people from different nationalities can take part Write a letter to the editor of a local newspaper requesting him to publish information about this What activities you have planned When th 89
- Nowadays employers prefer youngsters to aged experienced employees Do you support this growing trend What are its reasons Express our own point of view 92
- Some people think spending a lot on birthdays and marriage celebrations is a waste of money but others think it is important to the young people and the society Discuss both views and give your opinion 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, similarly, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, in other words, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 41.998997996 140% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1893.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 349.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42406876791 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05164453694 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.567335243553 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 594.0 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.76152304609 252% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.1317275426 49.4020404114 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.166666667 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3888888889 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38888888889 7.06120827912 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203913855573 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0620167527151 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0484793489479 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109488069131 0.151304729494 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0168035935661 0.056905535591 30% => 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: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.