The more money a person has, the more he or she should give away to the charities.
As the society develops, more issues such as the gap of property have also surfaced. Therefore, people have debated about the approaches to eradicating poverty and achieving a better balance between the poor and wealthy. Some claim that wealthy people should donate more money to charities to help the government narrow the gap. However, in my opinion, we should not demand the wealthy to give away their money for the following reasons.
Firstly, though it will make a huge difference if the rich can devote more money, they are entitled to allocate money only according to their own free will. Admittedly, some people may have been more fortunate and seized more resources, after which they even have exploited others to work overtime in order to chase after more profits. However, governments are all aware of the fact and have enacted certain policies and laws to alleviate the situation. For example, both in China and America, the most wealthy people are imposed as high as 75 percent of income tax and inheritance tax. The revenues are channeled into fiscal expenditure such as public welfare and medical care. In this way, people with more money have already fulfilled their obligations for the society and contributed a lot, be willingly or reluctantly. As a result, it is inappropriate to ask them again to dedicate another portion of their property to charity organizations without legitimate claims. What’s worse, the demand itself is a violation of property laws that guarantee citizens’ basic human right to claim their own property. If their money could not be protected, people with less property would feel more panicked, which can cause universal distrust for the government and system that require people with more money to sacrifice more for charity causes.
Secondly, forcing the rich to donate more money can have backlash effects, reversing their original aim to build a better society. For example, according to the Harvard University Professor of Economics Gregory Manikw's "10 Principles of Economics," social welfare programs both from the government and charity organizations, particularly for the underemployed or unemployed, can create disincentives for people to find gainful employment. Manikw asserts that people respond to incentives.They are willing to work since there is the motivation to earn an income. However, asking the rich to donate more can risk removing this incentive by providing stable salaries for those who are unemployed or unwilling to work, meaning they no longer have a need to become part of the labor force. What’s worse, with more funds from organizations ready to offer, it is more likely for people to file fraudulent applications and ask for support and food stamps. As a result, the whole production of the society may quickly fall. Thus the proposal that people among the top rich should donate more should be negated.
Admittedly, some may claim that wealthy people do not need such a large amount of money, and thus should contribute more to the development of the society. However, it is not sustainable to require them just to donate money to charities. Instead, they could invest more in upgrading and advancing modern technology that can radically increase the efficiency of production, such as what Musk from Tesla has been doing. Also, they could support new born businesses and expand job openings, helping more people to support themselves and get own on their own feet.
For the reasons and examples mentioned above, I strong disagree with the statement.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-15 | mrhj75 | 75 | view |
| 2022-08-09 | abusrddddd | 73 | view |
| 2022-08-09 | abusrddddd | 73 | view |
| 2022-06-19 | Rustin_Panda | 70 | view |
| 2021-08-05 | reeya kiran | 70 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 252, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...Manikws '10 Principles of Economics,' social welfare programs both from the ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 499, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: They
...serts that people respond to incentives.They are willing to work since there is the ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1026, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...uction of the society may quickly fall. Thus the proposal that people among the top ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for example, such as, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 9.8082437276 224% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 52.1666666667 128% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2976.0 1977.66487455 150% => OK
No of words: 572.0 407.700716846 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2027972028 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.89045207381 4.48103885553 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74677445659 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 296.0 212.727598566 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517482517483 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 946.8 618.680645161 153% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.3639586491 48.9658058833 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.04 100.406767564 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.88 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.28 5.45110844103 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 11.8709677419 152% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.286830538924 0.236089414692 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0861570604217 0.076458572812 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816284623312 0.0737576698707 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165451326439 0.150856017488 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0908256188163 0.0645574589148 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 152.0 86.8835125448 175% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.