Some people believe that the range of technology available to individuals is increasing the gap between rich people and poor people. Others think this has an opposite effect. Discuss both view and give your own opinion.
While many people believe that technology advancements have narrowed the gap between rich and poor, others argue that these developments have further pushed them away from each other. I will discuss both views and give my opinion.
On the one hand, technological progress has widened the rich-poor gap. With the advent of automation, the poor and unskilled workers are being replaced by robotics, leaving them struggling to make a living. By contrast, the rich, business owners, in particular, enjoy higher productivity brought by automated machines, and, therefore, make more profits. Automation, as a result, pushes the affluent further towards prosperity and, at the same time, drives the poor to even greater despair by depriving them of their livelihood.
On the other hand, the availability of smartphones and the Internet have helped connect people in an unprecedented way. People, nowadays, irrespective of their economic grounds, could discuss a topic of common concern via social media such as Facebook or Twitter. These types of conversations are not likely to happen in the past since people are restricted to their roles as bosses and staff, or as customers and service-givers, leaving them little space to freely express their views about the world. Moreover, the Internet has offered everyone instant access to online information, which further promotes equality between the rich and the poor. For example, a poor person can read online news from the BBC or the guardian, which makes him as knowledgeable and well-informed as those who have money.
In conclusion, it seems to me that the proliferation of technology brings both positive and negative impact on the gap between rich and poor.
- Oil use of major consumers 77
- The best way to reduce youth crimes is to teach their parents parental skills To what extent do you agree or disagree 61
- Oil consumption by major consumers 67
- The best way to solve world s environmental problems is increase the cost of fuel Do you agree or disagree and give your own opinion 67
- Oil use of major consumers 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 96, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an unprecedented way" with adverb for "unprecedented"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...the Internet have helped connect people in an unprecedented way. People, nowadays, irrespective of thei...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, moreover, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in conclusion, in particular, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1438.0 1615.20841683 89% => OK
No of words: 271.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30627306273 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8846979999 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.634686346863 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 442.8 506.74238477 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.4033373181 49.4020404114 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.833333333 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5833333333 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3333333333 7.06120827912 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279785801144 0.244688304435 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100322795243 0.084324248473 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0802171877915 0.0667982634062 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180932824136 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0908333849938 0.056905535591 160% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.0946893788 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.62 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.