Some people think that human needs for farmland, housing, and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals. Do you agree or disagree with this point of view? Why or why not? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
I agree with the statement that satisfying human needs is a higher priority than preserving natural habitat for endangered species. I feel this way for many reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.
First and foremost, allowing individuals and businesses to utilize more resources, such as more land and more raw materials, will decrease poverty and will have a positive impact on the society as a whole. With the rising in human population on the planet, more resources are required to meet the increasing demands for commodities. Keeping vast areas of lands untapped in the name of protecting wildlife seems preposterous to me. To clarify, a large population with limited access to resources could lead to a hike in the cost of living and more importantly, more people would find themselves falling below poverty lines. Although conserving the natural beauty of Earth sounds like something we need to pay attention to, our priority should go first to improving the quality of life of fellow human beings.
Secondly, extinction is adamantly a part of species existence. It's well-known that almost half of all the species that were once abundant died out even before the evolution of humans. Why are we so occupied by saving other species and the planet? some people claim that every species we have today is somehow significant for a so-called ecological balance. However, I believe this argument is flawed since humans drove many animal species to extinction and no major disaster happened to the environment. I can mention here examples like the Tasmanian tiger and different kinds of mammoths.
Lastly, enforcing laws to protect certain habitats would be costly for governments. Allocating large sums of money to law enforcement agencies and courts would be needed to make sure the lands are protected for wild animals. Low-income people who are not able to make it through the middle-class would be more dissatisfied with their hypocrtical officials who would appear more caring for animals while some people cannot afford the cost of basic needs like healthcare and housing. In other words, developed countries are dedicating millions of dollars for species preservation; hiring more law enforcement personnel to enact endangered species laws, purchasing surveillance technology to ensure no one is building on these regions. Not all governments can afford to do that since they have other problems that they have to observe. Hence, spending millions of dollars on species preservation will be a cause for public discontent.
To conclude, I strongly concur with the opinion that fully exploiting national resources is far more important than leaving huge land masses untouched. This is because all states have a specific proportion of their population still cannot meet their basic needs and budgets should be devoted to these more important issues.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-20 | Dimitrina | 60 | view |
| 2019-12-21 | Manu2525 | 70 | view |
| 2019-12-06 | bishoy | 76 | view |
| 2019-11-07 | MOHD ARAFAT | 76 | view |
| 2019-11-07 | MOHD ARAFAT | 76 | view |
- In 1938 an archaeologist in Iraq acquired a set of clay jars that had been excavated two years earlier by villagers constructing a railroad line. The vessel was about 2,200 years old. Each clay jay contained a copper cylinder surrounding an iron rod. The 3
- The sea otter is a small mammal that lives in waters along the western coast of North America from California to Alaska. When some sea otter populations off the Alaskan coast started rapidly declining a few years ago, it caused much concern because sea ot 73
- In many organizations perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages First of all a group of people has a wider range of knowledge exper 82
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?For success in a future job, the ability to relate well to people is more important than studying hard in school.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily.Use specific reasons and ex 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 248, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Some
...by saving other species and the planet? some people claim that every species we have...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, well, while, i feel, such as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 43.0788530466 72% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 52.1666666667 115% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.0752688172 235% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2432.0 1977.66487455 123% => OK
No of words: 460.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28695652174 4.8611393121 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77215683127 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 212.727598566 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.573913043478 0.524837075471 109% => OK
syllable_count: 762.3 618.680645161 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2979560705 48.9658058833 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.80952381 100.406767564 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9047619048 20.6045352989 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.14285714286 5.45110844103 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.270138299789 0.236089414692 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718335869593 0.076458572812 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0495506446898 0.0737576698707 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145561446484 0.150856017488 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0367879708927 0.0645574589148 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 11.7677419355 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 58.1214874552 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 10.9000537634 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 86.8835125448 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.