Political decision making is an increasingly hot topic, especially in today's age. Furthermore, political opinions are often strikingly polarized and convoluted. When compared to the general public, it is true that politicians may be more educated and informed on the majority of concerns. However, depending on the context, politicians may demonstrate superior judgment only some of the time. For the best outcome, the general public should share the responsibility and be adequately represented in the process of policy institution.
Claiming politicians have better judgment and perspective assumes a universal intent. There are many reasons that guide a political decision, and there is no guarantee that these decisions will align with the public's desires or needs. Politicians are often subject to greed or corruption. Even though one may be more informed on a decision does not indicate that the best choice of action will be selected. If a sponsoring corporation is pushing for higher tax breaks, officials will be inclined to succumb. Even though promoting corporate greed and noncompliance may have a devastating and negative effect on the public, politicians may indeed seek their own self preservation and act only in self-interest. It would benefit the public to be involved in these decisions in order to hold politicians accountable for their actions.
Building on this concept is the idea that many political leaders can be considered to be out of touch with the rest of society. Their perspective is limited to their own experience. These so-called experts make decisions for others without fully considering how it may affect everyone. For instance, government officials may decide to go to war centered around the acquisition of desirable resources. It is rare that these same decision making experts will be part of the armed military populace physically involved in the conflict. Politicians will not be willing to risk their own lives and act only in the interest of the political party and fiscal gain. There is little regard for the safety of the general public. It would be ideal to directly involve those who would be affected by any decision. Having a fair and equal representation would help bolster perspective and therefore limit an outcome of inequality and dissatisfaction.
In conclusion, there are indeed some decisions that the government and political experts are well suited for. However, despite being better informed, there are a variety of influences that determine a course of action that can lead to undesirable outcomes. Political judgment is highly variable depending on context and perspective. Therefore, major policy decisions should be a responsibility that is equally shared with the general public.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 183, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ed and convoluted. When compared to the general public, it is true that politicians may be mor...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 376, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... may demonstrate superior judgment only some of the time. For the best outcome, the general...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 420, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... of the time. For the best outcome, the general public should share the responsibility and be ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 290, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[2]
Message: “Even though” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...e often subject to greed or corruption. Even though one may be more informed on a decision ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 704, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... is little regard for the safety of the general public. It would be ideal to directly involve ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 427, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ibility that is equally shared with the general public.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, for instance, in conclusion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 58.6224719101 80% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2328.0 2235.4752809 104% => OK
No of words: 431.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40139211137 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03588108872 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 215.323595506 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512761020882 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 758.7 704.065955056 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => 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: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.1240094192 60.3974514979 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 93.12 118.986275619 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.24 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.64 5.21951772744 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.318792773799 0.243740707755 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0875621308427 0.0831039109588 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0651225697113 0.0758088955206 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204837415115 0.150359130593 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0241935555207 0.0667264976115 36% => 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: 12.6 14.1392134831 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 48.8420337079 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.74 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.02 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 100.480337079 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => 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.