The effectiveness of a country's leaders is best measured by examining the well-being of that country's citizens.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
With the rapid development of China recently, people are discussing about whether the prosperity can be attributed to China's leaders and how to measure their contributions. The author claims that how well a country's citizens live is the most important indicator for the leaders' effective performance in that country. I tend to agree with the statement.
The major reponsibility of a country's leaders is ensuring the citizens to live in a safe, positive environment with opportunities to grow and raise future generations. Without a suitable environment to live in, citizens could not ensure their lives to run as per normal, let alone the country's progress. For example, a few countries in south America such as Argentinant and Cuba suffered from tremendous currency depreciations in the past few decades. Within just a few days, the value of theirs currencies might crash by more than 30 or 50 percent compared to US dollars. People's properties were vaporized overnight. Thus, a country's leaders must provide a stable national environment for their people to sustain their normal livings.
The public wellfares including technology, education, culture and safety are key aspects to determine whether the leaders are performing their duties. Generouly, people tend to enjoy their lives more if they are able to spend more time or money on their personal affairs or recreations. For instance, China's presidents including the last one Hu Jintao and the current one Xi Jinpin, pay tons of attentions to the high-speed train development. Within less than two decades, China now is able to connect 80% of major cities via high-speed rails. It is so convenient and enjoyable for citizens in China to commute or travel. Thus, people in China praise the contributions maded by those presidents and claim that they have been doing effective jobs.
Admittedly, someone might counter the point by claiming that some countries might sacrifice the citizens' well-being in order to achieve strong national power. It is true that under certain conditions such as post-war circumstances, a nation's leaders would place priorities on those re-construction projects such as rebuilding dwellings and railways or spending funds in fostering new factories. In these cases, it's rather effective to judge the leader's contributions by how the nation recovers than simply to measure the public walfare since there is no much difference for citizens if the nation is still undergoing a severe damage.
To sum up, in certain periods a country's leaders might focus on the country's overall strength at the expense of the citizens' well-being, but generally public wellfares are the best measurement of a country's leaders in most circumstances.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 552, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...asure the public walfare since there is no much difference for citizens if the nat...
^^
Line 7, column 618, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'severe damage'.
Suggestion: severe damage
...izens if the nation is still undergoing a severe damage. To sum up, in certain periods a cou...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, still, thus, well, for example, for instance, such as, it is true, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2295.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 431.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32482598608 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96204386282 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563805104408 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 701.1 704.065955056 100% => 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: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.0113561683 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.789473684 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6842105263 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.68421052632 5.21951772744 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.173867942388 0.243740707755 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0551902206467 0.0831039109588 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0571884048462 0.0758088955206 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12190266372 0.150359130593 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0736881214377 0.0667264976115 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.1392134831 106% => 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: 13.87 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 100.480337079 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => 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.