The effectiveness of a country’s leaders is best measured by examining the well-being of that country’s citizens.
Is the effectiveness of a country’s leaders best measured by examining the well-being of that country’s citizens? The speaker claims so. The effectiveness of a country’s leader and the best routine a country taken for the development definitely vary concerning phase of development of the country. I concede that the speaker is right in a considerable range of countries. Otherwise, in my view, there are still some examples out of the range, and their leaders’ effectiveness should be evaluated through other factors. Therefore, an all-sided consideration is needed when deciding precedence.
Think about it. Why does a country need to choose a leader? Many years ago, human beings lived their own lives without the relationship with each other. No one knows the concept of country, and the leaders of the country are nowhere to be found. However, this was a dangerous method for people to live on, because a single illness, or an unnoticed shortage of food could be catastrophic. So the population began to form a union, of course, a union need a leader, so that it could operate stably. And then, countries began to form. If people get together and work together, they can surely avoid lots of risk of getting destroyed, so that they can achieve well-being. And how to work? It depends on the leaders. Now you see, the fundamental function of leaders is guarantee the citizens’ well-being. As far as most countries are considered, I share the same opinion with the speaker.
However, things are totally different in some countries in which citizens basic desire cannot be met. If we still concern about citizens well-being in these countries, we will simply discover that the leaders are unqualified at all. So what is the possible solution for the leaders to help the citizens get rid of poverty? Maybe setting up schools to improve the education condition in order to accelerate technology progress will help. Or maybe exploitation of tourist industry can be a wiser choice. In those countries, the short-term well-being cannot be criteria, and the leader who spends a large amount of money on helping poor families to survive may be foolish. So we would have look at the long-term development of the country.
Similar with the poor countries, the rich ones have their own approach to success, too. Putting expectation of other countries on them does not make sense. What the leaders of the wealthy countries whose citizens are already live in contentment should do is to focus on the future development. For instance, leaders who invest on environmental protection may be insightful, since the citizens can keep will-being a hundred years later. On contrary, leaders who just be interest in profit today may be scolded by their descendants in the future.
In sum, what standard we should use to measuring a country’s leader need to be considered with a lot of factors, such as the phase of development of the state. Different condition leads to different answer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 471, Rule ID: BE_INTEREST_IN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'interested'?
Suggestion: interested
...later. On contrary, leaders who just be interest in profit today may be scolded by their...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, look, may, so, still, then, therefore, well, for instance, of course, such as, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.5258426966 149% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2517.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 494.0 442.535393258 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0951417004 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71445763274 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01851729692 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538461538462 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 765.0 704.065955056 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 32.0 20.2370786517 158% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.5307894713 60.3974514979 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 78.65625 118.986275619 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.4375 23.4991977007 66% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.1875 5.21951772744 61% => 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 : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 17.0 4.83258426966 352% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.442924875759 0.243740707755 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107481746989 0.0831039109588 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.163867546192 0.0758088955206 216% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.269093302284 0.150359130593 179% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.148511040807 0.0667264976115 223% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 14.1392134831 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 48.8420337079 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 12.1743820225 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.0 12.1639044944 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.