Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
The issue of whether government should prioritize immediate problems over anticipated problems of the future has long been debated.
Before taking my stance on this subject, I would like to establish a few concepts in this argument. The fundamental difference between immediate issues and future problems lies in means of perception and impact. Immediate issues, which can be observed directly, impact the human society and nature world in tangible form, whereas issues of the future are deduced from current social and environmental phenomena, and therefore has yet brought any physical impact.
With above premises, I agree with the argument that government should deploy most of its resources on pressing issues of the current time instead of strategizing for future issues based on assumptions. With machine learning and big data heralding the era of artificial intelligence (AI), there have been countless heated discussion on the potential risk that AI could be out of control and eventually topple rules of human society. Such concerns are mainly derived from fast pace of development of technologies, which leave little time for policy makers to perfect related laws and regulations, and many times provide capabilities beyond comprehension of layman. Indeed, improper use of such technologies could lead to precarious situations, such as drones armed with facial recognition capability that can launch targeted strike. In this case, the immediate issue for government to solve is regulation and prevention of illegal usage, as there are substantial evidences that AI technology can perform such task. On the other hand, comprehensions on AI ruling humans are unfounded due to underlying principles of the technology, and therefore government should not digress to prevent this issue.
Some people may argue that it would be ignorant and short-sighted to overlook signs of future issues, as it may be too late when the posited issues come into reality. I totally agree with this point. As I stated earlier, government should make decisions on whether the issue is worth focusing on based on evidences of perception and impact. If there are logical evidences that there is a chance that the event may happen and ramification is huge, such as explosion of nuclear plants, no matter how small the chance is, preventive measures should be taken.
In a nutshell, I agree that government should focus on immediate issues rather than problems of the future, and make such decisions based on evidences of perception and impact.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-19 | jason123 | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-18 | Himanshu Sharma | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-26 | tg763622253 | 58 | view |
| 2019-11-27 | mohan41 | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-26 | louisetse | 66 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 934, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ulation and prevention of illegal usage, as there are substantial evidences that ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, may, so, therefore, whereas, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2138.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 400.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.345 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.472135955 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86041517965 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 215.323595506 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5525 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 673.2 704.065955056 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.5964027613 60.3974514979 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.533333333 118.986275619 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6666666667 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.33333333333 5.21951772744 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.193511095386 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718714315923 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0702194590177 0.0758088955206 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140204693228 0.150359130593 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0782721378219 0.0667264976115 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 14.1392134831 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.8420337079 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.66 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.