Claim: In any field — business, politics, education, government — those in power should step down after five years.
Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
Does the leader loose his charisma after five years of remaining in power? or does he become extremely corrupt after some time? The answer to this questions depends and varies from person to person. The claim of the prompt suggests that after five years we should change our leaders and the reason provided by the author states that success is based on revitalization of new leadership. I mostly, do agree with claim as well as reason provided in the prompt due to the following reason. However, I do concede that in some instances changing leadership every now and then is not advised and even in some cases outright harmful as a whole.
Firstly, the claims states that leadership should be changed every five years and I mostly agree with this claim. Take Sri Lankan politics for example, Rajapaksha family was ruling Sri Lanka because 70 percent of all the political departments were in the hands of brothers, sisters, wives and sons of Gotabaya Rajapaksha. As the whole family was ruling Lanka and they did not had any opposition they became extremely corrupt, the lankan government shut down the production of artificial fertilizers and banned farmers from using them and in turn they were mandated to use natural fertilizers. It is proved that natural fertilizer is good in long run but in short term the production of grains decreases drastically. The corrupt government didn’t take this simple fact into account. So, the agriculture dependent economy that was clearly not prepared for such drastic change in the production of grains. The economy collapsed and the whole family took the hard-earned tax payers’ money and ran away from Sri Lanka. If Sri Lanka had measure to stop politicians to not remain in power for more than 5 years the scenario would be different.
Additionally, the reason states that new leadership will bring new views and thus in turn benefit the enterprise. Again, I mostly agree with the reason because as people get older, they might not be in touch with the latest innovations and market trends. Here, if a new and younger person is brought into the leadership positions they might bring enthusiasm into the company because young people are hungry to prove themselves and would also bring motivation to the employees to work better and in turn be profitable for the company.
Nevertheless, I do concede that in some positions of power and natonal security changing leadership every now and then is not good for the country. For instance, take the post of Chief Justices in United States Supreme Court and imagine every new President has power to change and appoint new Justices to the Supreme Court. So, then the President would appoint Justices that are aligned with his view and so, Supreme Court would no longer remain unbaised. Indeed, Supreme Court may even be controlled directly by the political party in power. There would be complete chaos, opposition leader could be arrested and even sentenced to jail time. Thank God, that’s not the case currently as founding fathers have not done this grave mistake.
Thus, in conclusion, from the above reasons and discussions we can say that changing leadership after some time is a good practice best example of this is US President can become president for 2 terms only and not more. Having a upper limit to how many years a person can stay in top leadership will surely decrease the cases of corruption as well as nepotism prevalent in political systems. However, we should not change leadership related to defence and security of the country every five years as by retiring the existing generals we would lose people having vast amount of experience and thus by bringing new leadership soon would in turn bring the security of the country at risk.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 17, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
Does the leader loose his charisma after five years of remain...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 76, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Or
...after five years of remaining in power? or does he become extremely corrupt after ...
^^
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
... corrupt after some time? The answer to this questions depends and varies from perso...
^^^^
Line 1, column 553, Rule ID: EVERY_NOW_AND_THEN[1]
Message: Use simply 'now and then'.
Suggestion: now and then
...t in some instances changing leadership every now and then is not advised and even in some cases o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 377, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
...amily was ruling Lanka and they did not had any opposition they became extremely co...
^^^
Line 7, column 101, Rule ID: EVERY_NOW_AND_THEN[1]
Message: Use simply 'now and then'.
Suggestion: now and then
...nd natonal security changing leadership every now and then is not good for the country. For instan...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 123, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'practice the best'.
Suggestion: practice the best
...ng leadership after some time is a good practice best example of this is US President can bec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 228, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...t for 2 terms only and not more. Having a upper limit to how many years a person ...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, then, thus, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in short, as well as, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 14.8657303371 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3125.0 2235.4752809 140% => OK
No of words: 632.0 442.535393258 143% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94462025316 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.01394158123 4.55969084622 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54533433299 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 302.0 215.323595506 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.477848101266 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 967.5 704.065955056 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.5505283484 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.192307692 118.986275619 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3076923077 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.07692307692 5.21951772744 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 7.80617977528 102% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229873497159 0.243740707755 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.061924615163 0.0831039109588 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0604717749867 0.0758088955206 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125835858003 0.150359130593 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0467226060082 0.0667264976115 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 100.480337079 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.