People in the community can buy cheaper products nowadays. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
These days, the trend of purchasing low-priced goods is burgeoning at an alarming rate. This essay will argue that the advantages of this surpass the drawbacks. The essay will first demonstrate that this phenomenon decreases the gap among communities having varied economic statuses and helps to boost the economy of the nation, followed by an analysis of how the primary drawback such as cheap products are low in quality is not valid.
The main benefit of accessing low-budget products is that it eliminates the discrepancy between rich and poor. That is to say that both categories will access things having the same standards, which diminishes the feeling of inferiority from the minds of poverty-stricken. Moreover, both groups will access the same market that will strengthen their relationships. A recent survey conducted in the community has shown that using similar things and
services can shorten the difference among society. Apart from this, less expensive things encourage the masses to shop more, which in turn, more tax will be paid by individuals as a part of the price, and the government uses this amount in the development of the country. For example, in China, people are shopaholics due to less price of things and contribute about 34% of national income by paying taxes as a part of the cost of things.
Those opposed to this say that inexpensive items are bad in nature as the price of things is usually directly proportional to the standard of goods. However, there are some things that are high in character and are economically better. Taking Adidas as an example, it is a brand name that produces high-value clothes, and in the off-season, these are sold at more than 50% discount.
On balance, the fact that buying low-cost things provides the biggest benefits such as assistance in the progress of the nation and improve the relationships between the impoverished and those who are on the higher rungs of the socioeconomic ladder clearly outweigh the flawed argument that
it leaves people with substances having bad traits.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-29 | c0758910@mylambton.ca | 92 | view |
| 2023-11-29 | c0758910@mylambton.ca | 67 | view |
| 2023-10-25 | drmona.914 | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-04 | thada2607 | 84 | view |
| 2023-02-19 | scan010 | 78 | view |
- Today due to advanced medicine people are living longer Because of this older people are projected to outnumber younger people Do the advantages of this development outweigh disadvantages 84
- Nowadays more people are choosing to socialise online than face to face Is this a positive or negative development 84
- Children from 7 11 now spend more time watching television and playing video games than before What are the effects of this on children families and society What are the possible solutions to this problem 78
- Some people believe that cooking at home is a waste of time They feel it is better to buy fast food which is more convenient and less stressful in modern life Do you agree or disagree Give your opinion and examples from your own experience 67
- Today the quality of life in large cities is decreasing Discuss the causes and solutions 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, apart from, for example, such as, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1727.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 339.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09439528024 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29091512845 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80499177761 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569321533923 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 527.4 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 76.9853594012 49.4020404114 156% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.846153846 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0769230769 20.7667163134 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.15384615385 7.06120827912 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.38176352705 137% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.0898203749458 0.244688304435 37% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0284290934888 0.084324248473 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0334526382945 0.0667982634062 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0443686275127 0.151304729494 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0221683157105 0.056905535591 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 50.2224549098 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
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.