Some people claim that not enough of the waste from home is recycled. The say that the only way to increase recycle is for governments to make it a legal requirement.
To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?
Nowadays, using of unrecyclable materials is increasing and also the amount of garbage which are not gone back to resumption cycle is growing up too. Some people believe that these kinds of issue will be solved by strong punishment by administers. They can set the crucial rule for civilization who do not try to change their habit, while others think differently. In their opinion, law is not the only way that government can against with this problem. Legal requirement could be use after showing some solution. This essay will shed some lights on this argument from both sides, and extend my partial support to the latter view before arriving at conclusion.
Setting statute and put hard pressure on the people, causes that they recycle their domestic rubbish because of fear of severe penalty. It means that for breaking a rule or law they have to pay money. Moreover, putting heavy tax on company who produce materials which are not reused can be a good effect on increasing reprocess homes refuse. They can use kind of substance that they need less time to absorb to the nature or they are changed to first-hand materials easily. Besides, setting rule for big and small supermarkets that compel them to use renewable packages for their product or advertisement is one of the best solution for these problems, since the large usage of supermarkets goods is related to domestic’s consumptions, so it can be the best answer for it.
On the other hand, some people in society think that punishment or fine sometime have reverse effect on people. Encouraging or paying reward to someone who produce more recycle from their waste can be the best way to teach people. Because of that other civilization try to be a good citizen and also shows their responsibility with nature to receive retribution. In addition, for protecting earth and environment from garbage, advertising is a one of the didactic ways. TV or billboards advertising could improve people’s aware from dangerous of unrenewable material. Giving facility before enforce laws is another way to face with these problems. Government can build some recycle station near residential complex for helping them to separate their dry, wet, plastic, glass or any other rubbish. I mean that, recycling can start from individual’s home.
At the conclusion, experience shows that finding logical and motive solution always is better than punishment or fine. Generally, humans can accept better everything in tranquility and reject compulsory things.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-07-28 | Amir Nazaripoor | 78 | view |
| 2019-07-28 | Amir Nazaripoor | 78 | view |
| 2019-07-27 | Amir Nazaripoor | 78 | view |
| 2019-07-27 | Amir Nazaripoor | 78 | view |
- If a product is sold and people buy it, then advertising is not necessary and can be considered a kind of entertainment.Do you agree or disagree with this? 73
- You eat at your college cafeteria every lunch time however; you think it needs some improvements. Write a letter to the college magazine.- explain what you like about the cafeteria- say what is wrong- suggest how it could be improved. 73
- Your office building doesn’t have parking available.Write a letter to the manager. In your letter-Explain the problem-Suggest a solution-Say why parking will benefit all employees 89
- Some people think that public health within a country can be improved by government making laws regarding nutritious food. Others, however, think that health is a matter of personal choice and responsibility.discuss both views and give your opinion. 78
- Many people try to look younger than their age. What are the reasons people do this?Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing? 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, if, moreover, so, while, i mean, in addition, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 36.0 24.0651302605 150% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.3376753507 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2118.0 1615.20841683 131% => OK
No of words: 410.0 315.596192385 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16585365854 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83397841743 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 176.041082164 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575609756098 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 665.1 506.74238477 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5985242265 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.857142857 106.682146367 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5238095238 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.71428571429 7.06120827912 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.225985690304 0.244688304435 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0652894434178 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.046118146619 0.0667982634062 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121934451333 0.151304729494 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0884455324484 0.056905535591 155% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.0946893788 97% => 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: 12.71 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.