The pictures show information about average income and spending on food and clothes by an average family in a city in the UK.
The table illustrates how much money can be earned and used for food and clothes of an average family in a UK city, while the pie charts represent the proportion of spending on those categories in 2010 and 2013.
Generally, the total income of an average British family decreased between 2010 and 2013, while the amount of money spent on food and clothing increased. Additionally, the resident here paid much more money on food than clothes in both years.
As can be seen from the table, in 2010, people with average living standards in England made £29,000, and nearly half of them were applied in food and clothes. Over the next three years, the average income of a family in Britain fell to about £25,000. Meanwhile, there was a growth of £1,000 in the expenditure on food and clothes.
Regarding the pie charts, the percentage of spending on meat and fish was highest among all categories in 2010, at 29%, but three years later experienced a drop to 23%. Similarly, the rate of money using for clothes also went down from 15% to 13%. On the other hand, it seems that people expended more money on fruit, vegetables, and dairy products as the figures rose to 30% and 16%, respectively. Meanwhile, the proportion of spending on other food remained unchanged at exactly 18%
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-09 | vuhungbo | 61 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | vuhungbo | 61 | view |
| 2022-12-14 | Johndavisvu | 67 | view |
| 2021-03-28 | Narges.s | 72 | view |
| 2020-02-21 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 72 | view |
- Solving environmental problems should be the responsibility of one international organisation rather than each national government Do you agree or disagree 56
- The bar chart below shows the top ten countries for the production and consumption of electricity in 2014 73
- In the future it is expected that there will be a higher proportion of older people in some countries Is this positive or negative development 89
- The graph below shows UK air pollutants in millions of tonnes from three di erent sources between 1990 and 2005 89
- The range of technology available to people is increasing the gap between the rich and the poor Others think it has an opposite effect Discuss both views and give your opinions 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, regarding, similarly, so, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 6.8 176% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1058.0 965.302439024 110% => OK
No of words: 223.0 196.424390244 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74439461883 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53159567338 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 106.607317073 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.57399103139 0.547539520022 105% => OK
syllable_count: 311.4 283.868780488 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.8870805466 43.030603864 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.8 112.824112599 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1 5.23603664747 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.296967067459 0.215688989381 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111804250002 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0937346765305 0.0843802449381 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188015085448 0.15604864568 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0740478808253 0.0819641961636 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.2329268293 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 11.4140731707 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.49 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 39.0 40.7170731707 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.