People in the community now could buy cheaper consumer goods. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
In today's world, it is a common belief that people in the community can buy consumer items at a low cost. This trend could create certain benefits, but I believe that its drawbacks are far weightier.
On the one hand, it is said that purchasing inexpensive products has some noteworthy positive effects. First of all, there would be an increase in living standards, especially in many developing countries. It is true that families with an average income can now afford more consumer goods. To illustrate, according to Zing, which is one of the most prestigious online newspapers in Vietnam, approximately 25 years ago, a black and white TV set cost several million VND. However, today, an average-income family can afford an LCD TV from some famous brands, like Samsung or LG, at a much-reduced price of 5 million VND. As a result, many ordinary people in Vietnam have been living with a greater degree of comfort and convenience. Furthermore, this phenomenon would encourage positive competition. This might be explained by the fact that many items with similar functions and appearances are on the market since businesses have to innovate their products to stay competitive. Therefore, purchasing inexpensive goods not only helps citizens to get more affordable products but also helps generate revenue for society.
On the other hand, few disadvantages have arisen from consuming cheap goods. First and foremost, the reduction in quality is an expected result. As an illustration, many companies mass-produce at lower operating costs to meet the demand of the public, who mostly opt for inexpensive and low-quality products regardless of what brand name they have. For instance, an iPhone produced in China is reasonable for many less wealthy individuals in Vietnam, but it often breaks down after several days of use. Moreover, there would be no progress in commodity development. It can be attributed to a generation who is reluctant to spend their money on improving products' attributes, which leads to an error in technical growth.
In summary, despite the benefits that inexpensive products can bring, they still do more harm than good. From my point of view, cheap consumer goods are not usable even for an acceptable time and the government needs to enforce new laws to reduce the amount of low-quality associated with inexpensive commodities in the future.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-24 | linh allie | 89 | view |
| 2024-10-24 | linh allie | 84 | view |
| 2024-10-01 | tata | 11 | view |
| 2024-10-01 | tata | 11 | view |
| 2024-09-28 | tata | 56 | view |
- People living in large cities today face many problems in their everyday life What are these problems Should governments encourage people to move to smaller regional towns 67
- Some people think history has nothing or little to tell us but others think that studying the past history can help us better understand the present Discuss both views and give your opinion 73
- The chart shows the number of shops that closed and the number of new shops opening in a country from 2011 to 2018 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The tables give information about the average hours work by part time and full time men and women in three countries in Europe in 2002 and compare them with the European countries 74
- The diagram details the process of making wool Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1118, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...also helps generate revenue for society. On the other hand, few disadvantages hav...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, moreover, so, still, therefore, for instance, in summary, as a result, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2002.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 384.0 315.596192385 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21354166667 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96505618155 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 176.041082164 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611979166667 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 628.2 506.74238477 124% => 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: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.6005550741 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.222222222 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3333333333 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.55555555556 7.06120827912 121% => 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 : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.110084527644 0.244688304435 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0336926088592 0.084324248473 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0514898295263 0.0667982634062 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0862172870613 0.151304729494 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.058039628581 0.056905535591 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.