Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.
Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.
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.
While their major cities of a country are primarily in leading economic and cultural development, it is unnecessary to give financial burden to the government to ensure its thriving for the reasons for autonomous of big cities, the changeable of tourists and investment’s interests, and the tax.
For a big and important city in a country, the thriving and growing impetuous come from its autonomy and keep the city autonomous in return because of the investment and trade with other countries by connecting with their major cities. People living in the major cities are hardworking and the fame of the city keeps attracting newcomers come to work for the city. The lively work chance and thrilling activities are commercials for cities. Take a Tokyo for example, as a Japan’s biggest city and capital, millions of people come to Tokyo from all over the world for its growing job market, unique anime cultural, and all kinds of events. The government money goes to local areas instead of Tokyo. Conversely, the tax comes from Tokyo in a large amount. Thus, it is safe to say that the thriving of the big cities invests their country, not the opposite.
Although the big cities need government money to deal with the emergency and maintain their transportation condition, for example, the train, bus and bicycle’s renew need the government support, such expense is basic level far away from the cultural need mentioned in the claim. In fact, the growth of big cities is a process of dismissing their traditions. The traditions are keeping the global cultural away from the rapid change. For instance, many young people want to work in New York, London, and Tokyo for its international fame. Historical cities such as Kyoto in Japan becomes a tourist spot and remain very few of job. The money from the government is for its preservation, not for its thriving. People go there will see many aged people working in temples, traditional style of restaurant, and historical areas.
Therefore, we have to notice that the government money comes from tax income from their major cities and the cities’ growing determined by people working there and international fame. The money from the government is merely a maintaining part of its basic need. Although in traditional preservation dimension, the money from the government is correct, unfortunately, those cities are becoming more and more lagging behind major cities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...estment's interests, and the tax. For a big and important city in a countr...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e of restaurant, and historical areas. Therefore, we have to notice that the go...
^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... and more lagging behind major cities.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, for instance, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 11.3162921348 18% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2045.0 2235.4752809 91% => OK
No of words: 399.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12531328321 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8657304001 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 215.323595506 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.471177944862 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 633.6 704.065955056 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.3480811523 60.3974514979 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.611111111 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1666666667 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.61111111111 5.21951772744 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.238168740435 0.243740707755 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0843918331289 0.0831039109588 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0664109503884 0.0758088955206 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175770516026 0.150359130593 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0300215359998 0.0667264976115 45% => 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: 13.8 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 100.480337079 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 11.8971910112 164% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.