Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
It is the indisputable fact that the path to a thriving future goes through a satisfying and secure job. Taking this into consideration, evaluating positions in order to estimate the possibility of failure risk in the future is an essential step before finding a job. In this regard, some people approve of this idea that in comparison to the past, nowadays, it is difficult to anticipate the job prospect. On the contrary, others hold the opposite point of view. Personally, I concur with the former group due to a couple of reasons substantiating as follows.
To commence with, In today's life, the more vigorous competition in the job market, the more decrease in the chance of predicting a job's future. It is crystal clear that mushroom high-quality academic facilities and rapid-pace development of countries give rise to more and more people become high caliber, expert and versatile in the various fields. Under this circumstance, there are a plethora of competent candidates for job vacancies who create an extremely competitive environment for finding a suitable and stable career and keeping it. In this vein, employe always has a concern in their mind that they are under obligation to keep up with new transformation and rapid change in order to prevent losing their job or be subtle by the more accomplished workforce. Thus, evaluation of job security in today's competitive job market seems not practical.
The second worth-mentioning reason that comes into my mind is that galloping advancement in technology significantly convert career into more machine-based platforms. It goes without saying that the advent of technology, including the internet, computers, and robots that are capable of doing a vast number of tasks, gradually eliminates human-being from the job market. By way of illustration, development in medical devices comprising diagnostic and surgical robots culminate score of physicians and surgeon be substituted by these machines. In this line of thought, the medical profession is assuming very pivotal and prestigious in the past. Nowadays, it fades in comparison to new technology. Therefore, the fundamental role of human beings in job markets becomes less notable and jeopardizes the vast majority of human professions.
To draw a conclusion, I strongly advocate the notion that, in the past, it is more feasible to determine what career has a lower risk of failure. This is because, in the recent era, not only extreme competition job market endanger the security of jobs, but also the expansion of technology eliminates human workforce by the passage of time.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-25 | Zmx_6 | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-25 | Zmx_6 | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-29 | waliwaliwa | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-29 | waliwaliwa | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-29 | waliwaliwa | 73 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 64, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'go'?
Suggestion: go
...fact that the path to a thriving future goes through a satisfying and secure job. Ta...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, second, so, therefore, thus, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 9.8082437276 0% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 52.1666666667 142% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2186.0 1977.66487455 111% => OK
No of words: 416.0 407.700716846 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25480769231 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09775102139 2.67179642975 116% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 212.727598566 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.567307692308 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 705.6 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3990250739 48.9658058833 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.444444444 100.406767564 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1111111111 20.6045352989 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.27777777778 5.45110844103 60% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13720620906 0.236089414692 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0438457256736 0.076458572812 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0310976077712 0.0737576698707 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0867159234297 0.150856017488 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0206291289416 0.0645574589148 32% => 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: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 58.1214874552 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 10.9000537634 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.05 8.01818996416 125% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 86.8835125448 160% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => 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.