Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: The more money a person has, the more he or she should give away to charities.
By and large it is of little debate in today’s sophisticated world that charities are of great importance. This is inasmuch as charities can play influential roles in a community by providing health, food, safety, etc. With this in mind, it is quite expected to notice some of their aspects are somewhat controversial due to their prominent standing; many people wonder what organizations or who should pay more to the charities. One idea of prominence in this regard is that rich people should pay more to the charities than ordinary ones. I personally concur with it. Among many reasons one can give for this opinion two will be given and elaborated in the ensuing lines.
First of all, considering their financial situation, rich people can spend more money on such charity activities. The amount of money they can pay may help the charity to expedite its activities. Owing to the fact that ordinary people cannot spend too much on such activities, charities should wait more to save sufficient money for their projects. However, if rich people consider spending a regular big amount of money, charities can initiate their halted projects, and as a result poor people will benefit sooner.
Another interesting point which deserves some words here is that not only do affluent people can feel better by helping charities, but also they will benefit in other ways. For example, businesses can lower the amount of their tax by paying money to charities. Moreover, the more money a celebrity expend in charity activities, the more famous he or she will become. Therefore, they can assume these expenses as investing in their career. Take, for instance, Bill Gates who is a prominent person in computer industry. By establishing Gates Foundation, Bill Gates and his wife spend about 200 million dollars annually. According to their last report, between 2014 and 2016 they have provided more than 2500 African children with sufficient food.
To recapitulate, having analyzed the reasoning presented above, one can conclude that in contrast to ordinary people, rich people should give away more money to charities. This is owing to the fact that they can tolerate such expenses without any negative effects, and such activities will help them improving their business in some ways.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-07-03 | ela87urb@gmail.com | 90 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoni 93
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? To achieve successful development of a country, a government should spend more money on young children’s education rather than on universities 85
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In deve 37
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Sometimes people think nowadays the media (TV, newspaper, Internet) are less concerned about the accuracy of news than in the past, and the incorrect information may cause more problems to the public. 88
- Sometimes we are assigned to work in a group on a project. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The group will be helped more by person who will be willing to do what other group members want than by person who often strongly insists tha 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 300, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[9]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to improve' or 'improve'.
Suggestion: to improve; improve
...cts, and such activities will help them improving their business in some ways.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in contrast, as a result, by and large, first of all, in contrast to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 9.8082437276 214% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 52.1666666667 92% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1912.0 1977.66487455 97% => OK
No of words: 374.0 407.700716846 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11229946524 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3976220399 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65510040867 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 212.727598566 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550802139037 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 600.3 618.680645161 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.0886479127 48.9658058833 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.631578947 100.406767564 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6842105263 20.6045352989 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.21052631579 5.45110844103 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.85842293907 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20499187913 0.236089414692 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0726509944484 0.076458572812 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0719485830185 0.0737576698707 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136120500513 0.150856017488 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0282745547129 0.0645574589148 44% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 11.7677419355 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 10.9000537634 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 86.8835125448 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.