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.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
In an attempt to maintain efficiency in any aspect of a society ranging from politics of the public sector to business in the private sector, many suggest a recycling of individuals in power every 5 years. I believe this argument has merit within the public sector, involving politicians, police chiefs, supreme justices and every other elected official, however, I believe this constant cycling within the business sector could be harmful.
Within the public sector, a constant refreshing of elected officials encourages new, relevant ideas and morals which lays the ground work for up-to-date policies. As we look around our world today, it is obvious that those in political power and the policies being implemented are out of touch with the world today. Medical marijuana, for example is supported by the majority of the United States’ population, however it remains illegal on a federal level because those in office hold an outdated aversion towards the substance. Cycling our elected officials every 5 years would allow us to escape obsolete mindsets that are currently hindering progress of society on multiple levels.
In addition to ensuring relevancy, a constant cycling of elected officials also hinders corruption. Constantly switching out politicians will make it more difficult for back door deals simply because these individuals would have to risk approaching new politicians frequently to strike new illegal deals to replace the old politicians they had in their pocket. This would give the private sector less control over the public sector and help to decrease the wealth gap as policies will be friendly to average citizens instead of favoring big business.
As we transition to the private sector, I must waffle to the other side of the argument. By replacing business owners every 5 years, forcing them to leave the company they created, innovation is no longer incentivized. In today’s society, unless you are building an app, it would be impossible to create a successful business in just 5 years. By taking away the possibility for any individual to start their own successful business, there will be no desire to innovate and find a new niche in the market, halting society economically and technologically.
In the end, there are benefits to cycling those in power every 5 years, as it avoid staleness and encourages new thinking. However, I believe cycling within the public sector alone is enough to reach the benefits major benefits of progressive thinking without discouraging personal investment and risk taking within the market.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 127, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: groundwork
...elevant ideas and morals which lays the ground work for up-to-date policies. As we look aro...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, so, for example, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2176.0 2235.4752809 97% => OK
No of words: 410.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30731707317 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83122304214 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546341463415 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 696.6 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.6342175878 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.066666667 118.986275619 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3333333333 23.4991977007 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.53333333333 5.21951772744 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.10964181499 0.243740707755 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0398186864939 0.0831039109588 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0393007140621 0.0758088955206 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0632966488125 0.150359130593 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0265519467414 0.0667264976115 40% => 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: 17.2 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 48.8420337079 73% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 100.480337079 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.