Essay topic 17: Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
Governments serve people and they are responsible for the well being of the public and tackling the current problems of the society and the expected of the future. Therefore, governments should prioritize the type of problems to focus on immediate issues and the future problems respectively to increase their effectiveness.
First of all, immediate problems such as natural disasters, pollution and unemployment must be tackled by the government promptly. For instance, if an earthquake occurs, the government must provide food supplies, emergency relief and medical resources and immediately. Current pollution in major cities like Tehran is one of the immediate problems which should be addressed by the government as smog is threatening the health of citizens. Thus, the government had better ponder over the efficient solutions to reduce the air population. Unemployment is another example of the existing perilous issues of developing countries such as Iran that must be dealt with as it is directly related to the country’s economical condition and stability of people’s life as well as the crime rate of the society. In the above mentioned circumstances, prioritizing the issues is obviously the correct choice.
However, some may argue that it would be ignorant and short sighted to overlook the future problems as it may be too late to remove them. Some issues such as global warming and lack of water must be scrutinized by the governments to prevent fundamental catastrophes in the future. Consider the case of climate change in the future. Scientists have predicted that environmental changes will lead to occurrence of detrimental natural disasters including flood, drought and storm in the future. As a result, governments must consciously invest in unraveling/resolving these issues today to avoid the possibility of huge future calamities.
To conclude, governments should bear the responsibility of tackling the immediate problems while studying the possible future problems to avoid any irreparable disasters accordingly.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, first, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for instance, such as, as a result, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 33.0505617978 30% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 58.6224719101 70% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1760.0 2235.4752809 79% => OK
No of words: 312.0 442.535393258 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.64102564103 5.05705443957 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.55969084622 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25651120377 2.79657885939 116% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 215.323595506 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548076923077 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 547.2 704.065955056 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 6.24550561798 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.4479522956 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.714285714 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2857142857 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.85714285714 5.21951772744 189% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198516419573 0.243740707755 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.071474898708 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0633241646222 0.0758088955206 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14542742507 0.150359130593 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0540931803567 0.0667264976115 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 48.8420337079 66% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.73 12.1639044944 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.59 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.