Many companies provide important products or services, but also damage the environment. Some
people believe that the best way to stop companies from harming the environment is to require them to
pay a penalty such as higher tax or a large fine when they cause environmental damage. Other people
think there are better ways to stop the companies from harming the environment. Which view do you
agree with and why?
There are some moot points about companies which they products damage environment. The question of which ways is the best for stop companies from harming environment has aroused as the subject of controversy among authorities. Some people assert that penalty them is the best way. When it comes to my position I subscribe to the viewpoint that persuasive ways are better than punishment and work better. I have some reasons two of which will be expounded hereunder.
The first reason worth discussing here is that persuasive ways in this position work better because if authorities consider some punishments like increase taxing, companies can escape from this kind of penalty and continue their damaging manner. On the contrary persuasive ways tempt companies to try these ways. For instance, a discount on the taxes is very excited for companies. Due to the hard situation in economy corporations tend to decrease their expenses, therefore, they adept this suggestion very well. As a case in the point I vividly remember, two days ago I watched a show in BBC channel which shows in united state environmental authorities enact some rule to decline the taxes of companies which their products are environmentally friendly. My personal example competently corroborates to the points that persuasive ways are better than a penalty.
By the same token, another paramount reason is that financial aid is very attractive for companies because give rise to stagnation in markets, they absolutely need to financial aid to provide their expense and worker salary thus this kind of prize help them to continue their progress. My personal example demonstrates this reality, in our town, there is a company which produces glue. In order to a very competitive bazaar, they are near to bankruptcy. One of my friend work in these companies. He told me the government suggested to these companies to eliminate their material which is detrimental for natures and in return for this action government consider some financial support for these companies. My personal example shed some light to the point that authorities can provide financial aid to control damaging the environment.
To wrap it up, according to the aforementioned reasons persuasive ways is more useful than the penalty for companies. These kinds of manner not only prevent them from damaging the environment but also help them to continue their activity.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-23 | 30vil | 73 | view |
| 2017-11-13 | mehrdad.imnnn | 81 | view |
| 2017-11-13 | mehrdad.imnnn | 85 | view |
| 2017-11-13 | mehrdad.imnnn | 88 | view |
| 2017-11-13 | mehrdad.imnnn | 81 | view |
- Which one of the following values is the most important to share with a young child(5-10 years old)? 1.being helpful2.Being honest3.Being well organized 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People today spend too much time on personal enjoyment-doing things they like to do-rather than doing things they should do. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Older teenager (16-19) should be allowed to work at paid part-time job? 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?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.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- People should take time to relax with hobbies or physical activities that very different from what they do at work. 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance, kind of, on the contrary, by the same token
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 13.8261648746 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 52.1666666667 92% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2024.0 1977.66487455 102% => OK
No of words: 388.0 407.700716846 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21649484536 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86514487591 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 212.727598566 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.502577319588 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 642.6 618.680645161 104% => 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: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.0243042025 48.9658058833 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.526315789 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4210526316 20.6045352989 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.57894736842 5.45110844103 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230661332955 0.236089414692 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0802163805901 0.076458572812 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655676295621 0.0737576698707 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165287310692 0.150856017488 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.059328058356 0.0645574589148 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 11.7677419355 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 58.1214874552 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 10.9000537634 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 86.8835125448 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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: 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.