Some people say that children given pocket money every week will have
fewer money problems when they become adults. Do you agree or disagree?
Money has become an important issue among family members. A number of people think that giving pocket money to children weekly will reduce money problems in their future life as an adult. I completely agree with this view and I believe that children should learn how to manage a budget which is given by their parents.
First of all, it is thought that allowance received by parents does not contribute children’s life when they become adults. However, children learn about cash management in their early life if parents give them to a bit money per week. Moreover, children improve their money management skills by experiencing to spend their allowance. For example, research says that children can develop self-awareness to spend money, and it can be taught effectively how to handle a budget. Therefore, parents give pocket money to their children.
Secondly, children can learn how to spend a money wisely, and how to save money for their needs. Such childhood experiences teach children to put their money aside weekly and save their money, which is beneficial for them in the long run. For instance, today, many people, who did not learn to manage finances in early ages, suffer from more a high amount of debts than those who had a knowledge of cash management. Thus, pocket money given in early age is a useful tool to improve financial management.
In conclusion, a knowledge of money management requires an early experience of expenditure and savings. I fully agree with the idea that pocket money is an effective learning tool in associated with managing money in order to reduce future financial problems.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-01-12 | samar8363827 | 73 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 338, Rule ID: MORE_A_JJ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a more high'?
Suggestion: a more high
...age finances in early ages, suffer from more a high amount of debts than those who had a kn...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1359.0 1615.20841683 84% => OK
No of words: 270.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03333333333 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6140409095 2.80592935109 93% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 176.041082164 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.533333333333 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 423.9 506.74238477 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.4850713005 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.0714285714 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2857142857 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.14285714286 7.06120827912 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.315528034932 0.244688304435 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130789127775 0.084324248473 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0745970984445 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.214803236639 0.151304729494 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.066497069434 0.056905535591 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.0946893788 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.4159519038 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.68 8.58950901804 89% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 78.4519038076 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.