The world today is a safer place and government should stop spending larger amounts of money on their armed forces. Do you agree or disagree?
Gone are the days when governments had to spent hefty sum of money on the military forces to either intervene or to fight against the other country in the world war. Speaking of which throws light into other sensitive areas where the government should look into to improve life standards of the society. It is agreed that in contemporary times, our globe is safe and authorities should stop spending capital amount to strengthen armed forces. Analyzing both attention required to overcome unemployment issues and to combat environmental disasters will show this.
Firstly, it must be remembered that providing protection on the borders does not help to uplift life standards. For example, as per recent survey by BBC, the unemployment ratio has soared dramatically from 8% to 30% in the last decade in Africa. Unfortunately, due to this, huge numbers of people cannot even afford basic needs of life. Thus, this makes it clear why the government should spend capital amount on creating job opportunities for their unemployed citizens rather than buying nuclear weapons for unforeseen wars.
Secondly, it is commonly known that the globe is presently suffering from environmental crisis and we have seen natural disasters such as storms, earthquakes, wildfires greater than ever. For instance, because of Tsunami in Japan during last monsoon, millions of residents not only lost their homes, but also their valuable belongings and loved ones. Needless to say, officials should spend the money in forecasting and fighting such natural disaster, so that people do not lose their shelter and kin in some cases. From this, it becomes quite evident that the government should spend money on technology which can forecasts unexpected natural fatal rather than investing on military forces.
In summary, we discussed critical areas which need the government's attention and prompt actions. Thus, it is clear that when the world today is a safer place, the idea of investing huge amount of money on buying nuclear weapons and making military forces stronger than other nations cannot be supported. As such, it is predicted that the negative sides of focusing and investing on atomic weapons will be forever stronger than negative ones.
- It is observed that communication between family members in today s time is less as compared to the past However some people do not think so Do you agree or disagree 93
- The best way to deal with rising problem of traffic and transportation is by encouraging people to live in cities rather than in suburbs and countryside To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- The world today is a safer place and government should stop spending larger amounts of money on their armed forces Do you agree or disagree 89
- Some people believe that wild birds or animals should be forced out of the city while others think they should be kept in the city Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- Some people believe that preserving natural environment is crucial However most make no effort to do so Why do you think this is happening What are some simple actions that could help the environment 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 6, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
Gone are the days when governments had to spent ...
^^^
Line 5, column 614, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[2]
Message: The verb 'can' requires the base form of the verb: 'forecast'
Suggestion: forecast
...uld spend money on technology which can forecasts unexpected natural fatal rather than in...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 57, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...iscussed critical areas which needs the governments attention and prompt actions. Thus, it ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, thus, for example, for instance, in summary, speaking of, such as, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1892.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 358.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28491620112 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66016250064 2.80592935109 95% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583798882682 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 574.2 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.5583074663 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.133333333 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8666666667 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.66666666667 7.06120827912 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.9879759519 251% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263150673776 0.244688304435 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0731235625359 0.084324248473 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0763035868836 0.0667982634062 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142300830015 0.151304729494 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.047823726196 0.056905535591 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.