Having jobs with low salary and more security is better than jobs with high salary but easier to lose.
Nowadays, people have a variety of options when they are looking for a job. Opinions divert when salary and security contradict with each other. Some people prefer jobs with a good pay but easy to lose, while others would rather take a job with a low salary but secure. From my standpoint, I would choose a secure job, even if it only provides me a low income.
To begin with, a secure job is more likely to promise the future promotion and career success. Those who has been working for a company for several years are more likely to get a chance of promotion. In contrast, a high-pay job with low security means that the employee may lose the job before getting any promotion. Take my uncle, a professional programmer as an example. In the past several years, he has been worked for at least 3 various companies. Obsessed with high salary, he chose to work large enterprises where competition among employees were severe. The highly competitive environment forced him to change his work place again and again. It might have been much better if he had chosen a small corporation instead.
In addition, a job with great security could help avoid a lot of unnecessary pressure. Not faced with the risk of being unemployment, people could enjoy a more relaxing life. Currently, an increasing number of graduates in China choose to be public service employees, such as teachers. Compared with jobs in private enterprises, public positions are much securer. The security benefits the improvement of life quality. To illustrate, Mr. Wei, my math teacher in high school, has plenty of spare time after his daily work. He often goes fishing or do some reading during the weekends. With no overwhelming pressure from his work, he is able to spend his time on things that he enjoys.
Indeed, we should never ignore that a job with high salary but low security is appealing for risk takers. After all, it is those risk takers who made numerous successes in human history. Jack ma, the founder of Alibaba, quit his teaching position and founded his own company. Without his risk-taking spirit, he would never have been so successful. Nevertheless, the risk of losing jobs cannot be afforded by every job seeker. For most of them, a secure job is a wiser choice.
In sum, if I were seeking for a job, I would prefer a securer job with lower salary. Concerning the better chance of getting promotion and lower risks of being unemployed, this kind of job is better.
- Having jobs with low salary and more security is better than jobs with high salary but easier to lose 78
- Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long 73
- Some parents offer their school age children money for each high grade mark they get in school Do you think it is a good idea 73
- It is more important for students to learn ideas and concepts rather than facts 71
- TPO42 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 10, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nemployed, this kind of job is better.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, look, may, nevertheless, so, while, after all, at least, in addition, in contrast, kind of, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 52.1666666667 105% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2041.0 1977.66487455 103% => OK
No of words: 427.0 407.700716846 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.77985948478 4.8611393121 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59325571092 2.67179642975 97% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 212.727598566 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580796252927 0.524837075471 111% => OK
syllable_count: 646.2 618.680645161 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 10.0 3.08781362007 324% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.6003584229 136% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 19.252882106 48.9658058833 39% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 72.8928571429 100.406767564 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.25 20.6045352989 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.39285714286 5.45110844103 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.466190427114 0.236089414692 197% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123002451353 0.076458572812 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.115929475191 0.0737576698707 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.282174677424 0.150856017488 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0750369054444 0.0645574589148 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.7 11.7677419355 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 58.1214874552 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 10.1575268817 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.85 10.9000537634 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 86.8835125448 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.