During the times of economic crisis, which of the following should the government spend less
money on? a. Education b. Health Care c. Support for the unemployed
During the times of economic crisis, people often possess different perspectives on which aspects of
the budget allocation should the government spend less on: education, health care or support for the
unemployed. As for me, I strongly argue that the government should reduce the budget on support
for unemployed people because the government cares about budget control, citizens’ well-being and
reputation.
First of all, the government places emphasis on budget control, and cutting the budget for the
unemployed can help them successfully control their budget during the crisis. For example, when
the Hong Kong government encountered the economic crisis in 2008, they decided to reduce the
budget for unemployed people after careful consideration. Originally the government provided
20,000 NT dollars to each unemployed person, but during this time, it only gave them 8,000 NT
dollars. Moreover, the government can use that money to support other programs that really lack
economic support, such as helping homeless people in the streets or providing local nursing houses
more supplies. As a result, the government not only controls their budget successfully, but also can
save more than 100,000 NT dollars per month.
Secondly, the government cares about its citizens’ well-being, but reducing the budget on health
care may hurt its citizens. For example, the Vietnam government reduced the budget on health care
when it encountered a severe economic crisis 10 years ago. At that time, the amount of ambulances
dropped from 100,000 to 1,000 in every city. Also, there is only one doctor and one nurse on each
floor in the hospital to take care of patients. Therefore, many injured people cannot be cured in time
and even died of this reason. In contrast, if the Vietnam government chose to reduce the budget on
education, its citizens can still get easy access to medical resources under the depression and this
decision will clearly not cause such disasters. Apparently, cutting the budget for unemployed people
would not harm its citizens’ benefit that much.
Last but not least, the government focuses on its reputation during this period, but cutting the
budget on education can destroy its reputation. For example, the Chinese government chose to
reduce the budget on education while facing an economic crisis in 1997. Many experts and parents
criticized the policy. What’s worse, people decided to stage protests in the streets. Thus, the
government lost more than 30% of its citizens support in this year. On the other hand, If the
government reduced the budget on support for unemployed people, instead of education, experts
and parents may deem it as a wise decision because their children’s right to education would not be
affected. Thus, the government may win high appreciation from its citizens.
To sum up, the government should spend less on support for unemployed people. After all, the
government cares about budget control, citizens’ well-being and reputation.
- In many companies there is a mentoring system senior workers in a company will be required to mentor younger workers but in recent years some companies have also required younger workers to mentor senior workers Do you agree or disagree with the following 73
- Genetic modification a process used to change an organism s genes and hence its characteristics is now being used to improve trees Through genetic modification it is possible to create trees that produce more fruit grow faster or withstand adverse conditi 80
- It is important to have rules about the kind of clothing people should wear to go to work and school Do you agree or disagree with this statement 76
- A D It is more important for the government to spend money on art museums and concert halls than on recreational facilities such as swimming pools and playgrounds 73
- Summarize the points in the lecture being sure to explain how they address the specific concerns about forest fires described in the reading passage 75
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, if, may, moreover, really, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, thus, well, while, after all, as for, for example, in contrast, such as, as a result, first of all, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 15.1003584229 40% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 9.8082437276 153% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 43.0788530466 67% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 8.0752688172 384% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2581.0 1977.66487455 131% => OK
No of words: 474.0 407.700716846 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44514767932 4.8611393121 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66599839874 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70466521182 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455696202532 0.524837075471 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 747.9 618.680645161 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 14.0 3.08781362007 453% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.86738351254 375% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.160162956 48.9658058833 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.217391304 100.406767564 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6086956522 20.6045352989 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.78260869565 5.45110844103 179% => OK
Paragraphs: 32.0 4.53405017921 706% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.386843858408 0.236089414692 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123378065672 0.076458572812 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110631783743 0.0737576698707 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108458792311 0.150856017488 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.088202742015 0.0645574589148 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.33 10.9000537634 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.01818996416 96% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 86.8835125448 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.