Many working people get little or no exercise either during the working day or in their free time, and have health problems as a result.Why do so many working people not get enough exercise? What can be done about this problem?

It is observed that a significant large number of people do not take part in any exercise activity, however sometimes they may go for exercise, during routine working days. As a result, the life style they follow leads towards bad health conditions. There might be many reasons that impede working class to get involve themselves into physical exercises. Let us discuss the reasons and their solutions.

The bad financial situation of a person might be a reason for not participating into physical activities. Sometimes people have to do overtimes to make both ends meat. Thus, they got to spend extra time on their jobs. On returning back to home, they might have been drained all energy to go for exercise. So financial restrains may affect conversly to the willingness for exercise.

Aditionally, people might not be awared about the importance of physical activities and thus about the implications of this neglegancy. The situation might be more concerned in the less developed societies, whereas health matters are not taken with due seriousness.

To, solution, governments should introduce programs to educate their people about the physical activities importance. Further these programs must introduce on school levels. Besides to educate public, governments should provide appropriate exercise facilities in the vicinity of different areas. Moreover financial benefits in terms of gifts, for example, may also be introduced in the awareness programs.

To sum up, there are many reasons for ignorance about importance of physical activities, mainly financial issues and lack of awareness. Furthermore governments may make the situation less worse, by addressing core issues.

Votes
Average: 7.8 (1 vote)
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 222, Rule ID: RETURN_BACK[1]
Message: Use simply 'returning'.
Suggestion: returning
...t to spend extra time on their jobs. On returning back to home, they might have been drained a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 96, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'activities'' or 'activity's'?
Suggestion: activities'; activity's
...educate their people about the physical activities importance. Further these programs must...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 297, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...ies in the vicinity of different areas. Moreover financial benefits in terms of gifts, f...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 137, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...financial issues and lack of awareness. Furthermore governments may make the situation less...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 184, Rule ID: LESS_COMPARATIVE[1]
Message: Non-standard use of the comparative or superlative. Did you mean 'less bad', 'less ill'?
Suggestion: less bad; less ill
...more governments may make the situation less worse, by addressing core issues.
^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, thus, whereas, for example, as a result, to sum up

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1437.0 1615.20841683 89% => OK
No of words: 260.0 315.596192385 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52692307692 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89198801425 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.603846153846 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 456.3 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.2975951904 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.102836542 49.4020404114 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.5294117647 106.682146367 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2941176471 20.7667163134 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.47058823529 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213449201459 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0607616284955 0.084324248473 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0539587288153 0.0667982634062 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110869500552 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0692917023675 0.056905535591 122% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 39.33 50.2224549098 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.2 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.1190380762 79% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

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.