Q7. Countries with a long average working time are more economically successful than those countries which do not have a long working time. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the impact of average working hours on the economy has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that having longer working hours enables countries to invigorate economic growth, while others argue otherwise. Personally, I believe that both arguments should be given equal weight. In the following essay, the evidence supporting this contention will be discussed alongside relevant examples.
On the one hand, it seems difficult to refute the idea that nations where citizens devote a huge amount of time to work can stimulate economic progress. Perhaps the most compelling reason is that there are some nations experiencing economic success that were developed countries in the past thanks to long working hours. As an illustration, according to an article released by the Seoul Times, the economy of South Korea has flourished given that the figure for the gross domestic product of South Korea has skyrocket more than 20 times for the last four decades. In fact, it turns out that the main reason for this phenomenon is its longest working time amongst OECD countries.
On the other hand, it seems short-sighted to contend that having longer working hours is the sole way to facilitate economic progress. The most oft-cited argument against such a view is that although a multitude of developed nations, such as Australia and New Zealand, have never forced citizens to spend a vast quantity of time on work, they are still wealthy. This is because they earn an astronomical amount of money by selling raw materials, including crude oil and gas, in the global market. Thus, they have never had the urgent need for longer working hours, unlike some emerging nations suffering from a lack of invaluable energy sources. In light of the above, I also find these persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of the debate has its strengths, as discussed above.
- Q11 Many animal species in the world are becoming extinct nowadays Some people say that countries and individuals should protect these animals from dying out while others say we should concentrate more on problems of human beings Discuss both views and gi 84
- X 84
- Q1 Over the last few decades there has been an increase in international tourism Some people think that tourism is beneficial for local communities and should be encouraged To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- X 78
- Q4 Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems as well as practical problems To what extent do you agree with this statement 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 509, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'skyrocketed'.
Suggestion: skyrocketed
...oss domestic product of South Korea has skyrocket more than 20 times for the last four de...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, still, thus, while, in conclusion, in fact, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1707.0 1615.20841683 106% => OK
No of words: 334.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11077844311 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61451999379 2.80592935109 93% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 176.041082164 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595808383234 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 535.5 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.654092368 49.4020404114 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.8 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2666666667 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.220204836812 0.244688304435 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0633987578734 0.084324248473 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0610996430377 0.0667982634062 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111801777797 0.151304729494 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.076804198383 0.056905535591 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 78.4519038076 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.