high taxes on cigarettes and unhealthy foods
The author of the reading claims that imposing high taxes on cigarettes and unhealthy foods benefit everyone and provides three reasons to support. However, the lecturer refutes all the reasons made by the author and gives out three reasons why these are not true.
First of all, the author suggests that consumers of cigarettes who are subject to high taxes, may buy fewer cigarettes and this leads society to a healthier lifestyle. On the contrary, the lecturer holds an opposite view and points out that some of the consumers of this kind of stuff in this situation are more likely to buy lower quality cigarettes at a fewer price, so they will be in bigger health risks than before.
Secondly, the writer contends that this kind of taxes is fair. The lecture, however, rebuts this by mentioning that in this statement people's incomes do not be considered. Smokers who have lower income should pay the same rate of taxes that people with higher incomes pay. Thus, it is just a burden for people with smaller incomes.
Finally, it is stated in the article that the higher tax rate on cigarettes and unhealthy foods raise the government's revenue and this is good for all society. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that the government does not want to lose the revenue made by high taxes and may remove some policies regarding nonsmoking public areas. So society will not benefit from it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 242, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...ds an opposite view and points out that some of the consumers of this kind of stuff in this...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 107, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...igarettes and unhealthy foods raise the governments revenue and this is good for all societ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, thus, kind of, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1169.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 241.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85062240664 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94007293032 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.35262757221 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.547717842324 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 361.8 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.9277802273 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.272727273 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9090909091 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.2727272727 7.06452816374 174% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.309779071139 0.272083759551 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111943547063 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.138920839226 0.0662205650399 210% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183152571895 0.162205337803 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0939138443743 0.0443174109184 212% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.