The range of technology available to people is increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Others think it has an opposite effect. Discuss both views and give your opinions.
With the terrific development of technology in the past few decades. This leads to a debate on whether the availability of technology widens or reduces the gap between the poor and the rich. In my view, I agree that technology improvements decrease the gaps between social classes. This essay will discuss both points of view.
On the one hand, having easy access to the latest and most advanced technology can bring a number of benefits to people. Advancements technology have brought about large changes in the way people work and do business. Technology has enhanced the productivity of most businesses around the work, particularly in manufacturing processes. This trend has consequently boosted the profits of many companies, and therefore possibly made many wealthy businessmen even richer, thereby increasing the affluent gaps. Furthermore, the progression of technology gives birth to expensive developments that the poor can not afford such as new medical treatments and medicines. For instance, Novo Nordisk pharmaceutical firm was successful in figuring out medicines is treating haemophilia -a rare and once extremely expensive genetic disorder, making people who without good living conditions are not able to reach.
On the other hand, with an increase in the availability of many new technologies, it is also becoming cheaper for the large majority of people, which has provided equal opportunities between people, whether rich or poor. For example, the internet has widespread throughout the world these days, and it has supplied for people tools which can be used to collect all financial status or access to a great deal of useful information. Thereby, they can use to their advantage to help them educate themselves in order to live better lives. In addition, the range of technology lessens the difference in living standard between the rich and the poor because it gives people of the lower class easier approach to goods that used to be considered exclusive for the upper class. The wider the range of technology developments, the cheaper the price. To illustrate, ten years ago, smartphones were considered a luxury good while in recent years, anyone can easily buy one when there are so many brands and models to choose from. This not only narrows the material gap but also changes the people's mindset by enhancing the lower class's self-esteem and diminishing the rich's disrespect to the poor.
In conclusion, while the debate about the effects of technology on the social classes' gap. I firmly believe that the range of available technology helps to decrease the gap between rich and poor people.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-23 | maidiem.1508 | 73 | view |
| 2022-09-21 | vishal sachdeva | 89 | view |
| 2020-09-10 | longpm2k | 78 | view |
| 2020-09-10 | longpm2k | 78 | view |
| 2020-09-07 | datkhoa121 | 84 | view |
- The best way to ensure the growth of children is to make parents take parenting courses Do you agree or disagree 89
- These days people in some countries are living in a throwaway society which means people use things in a short time then throw them away What are its causes and what impacts can it have 85
- The chart below shows the percentage of the population in the UK who consumed the recommended daily amount of fruit and vegetables in 2002 2006 and 2010 73
- In the future it is expected that there will be a higher proportion of older people in some countries Is this positive or negative development 89
- The chart below shows the percentage of the population in the UK who consumed the recommended daily amount of fruit and vegetables in 2002 2006 and 2010 57
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1080, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'peoples'' or 'people's'?
Suggestion: peoples'; people's
...s the material gap but also changes the peoples mindset by enhancing the lower classs s...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 79, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'classes'' or 'class's', 'classis's'?
Suggestion: classes'; class's; classis's
...the effects of technology on the social classes gap. I firmly believe that the range of...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, if, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, in my view, 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: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 41.998997996 148% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2209.0 1615.20841683 137% => OK
No of words: 422.0 315.596192385 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2345971564 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.20363070211 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86879930176 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 176.041082164 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.57345971564 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 693.9 506.74238477 137% => 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: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.2944960688 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.263157895 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2105263158 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.26315789474 7.06120827912 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.335770427507 0.244688304435 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101054560583 0.084324248473 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0832616152871 0.0667982634062 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22467019816 0.151304729494 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0801296073435 0.056905535591 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => 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: 13.05 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 78.4519038076 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.