It is popular that many countries provide financial support for those who are not currently participating in the labour force. Overall, this policy is a positive initiative, offering relief to the unemployed who are dealing with livelihood challenges. However, the effectiveness of this policy largely depends on how people use their given funds.
First, government financial support is a lifesaver for the unemployed. For example, in Canada, millions of people are unable to go to work or secure jobs due to the outbreak of Coronavirus, a communicable respiratory disease that has been infecting thousands of people daily. To support its unemployed people, the Canadian government has been providing each eligible individual with a relief fund of two thousand dollars per month, which is sufficient for most people to cover their basic expenses. As a result, the majority of Canadians can enjoy staying safe and healthy from home without worrying about going to work during the heat of the pandemic. Therefore, unemployment financial support is an effective remedy for those who are struggling with their livelihoods.
However, the effectiveness of unemployment financial aids chiefly depends on how recipients use them. On the one hand, these aids appear to be most effective when given to workers who are self-motivated and eager to work. In this case, workers only wish to receive this means of support temporarily during the uncertain times, then stop registering for it as soon as/immediately after they can return to work or find suitable jobs. On the other hand, these funds can have adverse consequences if they are put in the hands of passive workers, who are unmotivated to apply for jobs or even quit their jobs voluntarily. These workers are opportunists who take advantage of government assistance and abuse the welfare system, contributing to the national budget deficit. Hence, unemployment financial aids can be a double-edged sword depending on who receives them.
In conclusion, although unemployment financial support may not always be a positive development for society depending on how recipients decide to use them, this program is indeed a great boon for workers during the hard times in their careers. Governments should continue implementing this program, as well as put great effort into recipient eligibility verification to reduce the deficit in their national budgets and promote a sense of fairness in their citizenry.
- Leisure is a growing industry but people no longer entertain themselves as much as they used to because the use of modern technology has made them less creative Do you agree and disagree 95
- In some countries governments provide payments for unemployed people How does this impact people Is this a positive or negative development 89
- Some today argue that schools are no longer necessary because children can learn so much from the internet and be educated at home To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- In some countries governments provide payments for unemployed people How does this impact people Is this a positive or negative development 87
- Many people believe that film is a less important art than other forms such as literature and painting To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 181, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...be most effective when given to workers who are self-motivated and eager to work. In th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, well, for example, in conclusion, as a result, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2075.0 1615.20841683 128% => OK
No of words: 386.0 315.596192385 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37564766839 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02002875925 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 176.041082164 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.549222797927 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 657.0 506.74238477 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.97106374 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.6875 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.125 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.375 7.06120827912 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.262474608928 0.244688304435 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0870306658172 0.084324248473 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0599453675075 0.0667982634062 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175479367929 0.151304729494 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0583752719845 0.056905535591 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.0946893788 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.