The market for the luxury-goods industry is on the decline. Recent reports show that a higher unemployment rate, coupled with consumer fears, has decreased the amount of money the average household spends on both essential and nonessential items, but especially on nonessential items. Since luxury goods are, by nature, nonessential, this market will be the first to decrease in the present economic climate, and luxury retailers should refocus their attention to lower-priced markets.
The following argument is not entirely logically sound for numerous reasons. Primarily, the argument is based on the unjustified assumption that, since luxury goods are, by nature, nonessential, this market will be the first to decrease in the present economic climate causing its main conclusion the market for the luxury-goods industry is on the decline, to be invalid.
The argument did not provide any justification that high unemployment will necessary lead to decrease in the purchase of luxury goods. What if there is possibility that luxury goods are more affordable than essential goods. This will render the assumption baseless. Had the argument provided information regarding the will price of luxury goods relative to essential good. Even then it would not have been sufficient to justify the assumption because it is possible people could not stop purchasing luxury good because of their liking for it or addition.
Secondly, the Argument never addresses some unanswered questions. Even if unemployment is going to cause decrease in the amount people spend, it does not necessarily mean the effect will first be felt on the retailers of luxury goods. What if those who consume or purchase Luxury good are lucky to still hold their Jobs and if few employment opportunities are given to lover of luxury goods.
Finally, the argument claims without warrant that luxury good industry in on a decline. There is possibility that Luxury goods sales is seasonal or may be not, and since the author did not provide details about luxury good sale and season such assumption is still lacking.
Because the argument makes several unjustified assumptions, it fails to make a convincing case that luxury goods industry in on a decline.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 11 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 280 350
No. of Characters: 1427 1500
No. of Different Words: 145 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.091 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.096 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.715 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 104 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 80 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 59 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.538 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.236 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.403 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.621 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.082 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 108, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'goods'' or 'good's'?
Suggestion: goods'; good's
...s to make a convincing case that luxury goods industry in on a decline.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 55.5748502994 54% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1471.0 2260.96107784 65% => OK
No of words: 280.0 441.139720559 63% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25357142857 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77727430244 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 204.123752495 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.517857142857 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 468.9 705.55239521 66% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.3330829522 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.153846154 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5384615385 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.15384615385 5.70786347227 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.210268745339 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0817478349075 0.0743258471296 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0456800413746 0.0701772020484 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126221348028 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0271713033877 0.0628817314937 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 98.500998004 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.