companies should provide sports facilities for local communities. To what extend do you agree?
The provision of sports facilities for local communities by companies has been a topic of discussion and warrants consideration. The question at hand revolves around the extent to which companies should be responsible for such amenities. This essay will delve into both perspectives and offer my personal viewpoint.
Advocates argue that companies have the capacity and resources to offer sports facilities to communities. By leveraging their financial capabilities, companies can invest in infrastructure that benefits the public. For example, they can construct sports complexes or sponsor sports teams, thereby encouraging physical activity and fostering a sense of community. Such initiatives can have a positive impact on the lives of local residents. A concrete example would be a technology company allocating funds to build a basketball court for the community, enabling individuals to engage in sports and promoting a healthier lifestyle.
On the other hand, opponents contend that the responsibility for providing sports facilities lies with the government. They maintain that elected governments are accountable for serving the needs of citizens and should allocate public funds for the construction and maintenance of such amenities. This approach ensures equitable access for all members of society, regardless of their financial means. Moreover, government involvement guarantees proper regulation and oversight, ensuring safety and inclusivity within the facilities. For instance, a government can establish a public park with a variety of sports amenities, ensuring that individuals from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds can benefit from sports and recreation.
In my opinion, while it is commendable for companies to contribute to the community by providing sports facilities, it should not be their sole responsibility. The government should play a significant role in facilitating and supporting the development of such facilities. Collaborative efforts between the private and public sectors can lead to more comprehensive and sustainable solutions. For instance, a company can partner with the government to establish a sports complex, with the government overseeing its accessibility and maintenance.
In conclusion, while companies can make valuable contributions by providing sports facilities, the primary responsibility should rest with the government. A collaborative approach between the private and public sectors is essential to ensure the availability of sports facilities for all members of the local community. By working together, we can create a healthier and more inclusive society where individuals have access to recreational opportunities that promote physical well-being and community cohesion.
- Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal Some people however think that other types of progress are equally important for a country Discuss both views and give your own opinion 73
- Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal Some people however think that other types of progress are equally important for a country Discuss both views and give your own opinion 73
- Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal Some people however think that other types of progress are equally important for a country Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal Some people however think that other types of progress are equally important for a country Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- Some people say that to prevent illness and disease governments should focus more on reducing environmental population and housing problems To what extend do you agree or disagree 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, moreover, so, well, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2357.0 1615.20841683 146% => OK
No of words: 391.0 315.596192385 124% => OK
Chars per words: 6.02813299233 5.12529762239 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.37697032053 2.80592935109 120% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519181585678 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 736.2 506.74238477 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.3672164582 49.4020404114 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.85 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.55 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06120827912 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.309386734 0.244688304435 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105184608027 0.084324248473 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0841566936966 0.0667982634062 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203370337531 0.151304729494 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0278432485881 0.056905535591 49% => 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: 16.7 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.81 50.2224549098 53% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.69 12.4159519038 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.87 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 78.4519038076 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.