Government funding for pure science endeavors, such as space exploration, should be reduced in order to
direct more funding towards humanitarian science projects.
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 consider specific instances for which this statement
may or may not be true.
A broad view is mandatory for a government to run a country. A view which keeps checks on many programs-
economical programs, space programs, literacy programs, etc. The author states that the funds for science projects should
be reduced to increase funds for humanitarians projects. However, in my opinion, if there is an urgent need, only then, the government should reduce funds for science projects. Moreover, there are also other ways to fund humanitarian projects
instead of reducing the budget for projects like space programs.
A government runs a myriad of programs that contributes different percentages over positive growth of society - free education programs
contribute more than programs that provide loans, thus government can decide other programs that can be halt instead of reducing funds for science projects. For example, pakistan - with low literacy rates - runs a lot of programs and when it's current deficit increases, the government increases taxes to make sure all the programs run effectively- including pakistan's space program. it is a common strategy to make a priority list, concerning impact on society, and then filtering out the superfluous programs to keep the most efficacious programs up and healthy. In short, instead of reducing funds for the science program, one can consider alternate solutions as well.
Alternatively, there are cases were humanitarians projects are more important than science processes. For instance, when people of a country have low per capita income with no access to food and clean water, which ultimately affects the quality of life, should focus on humanitarian
projects to uplift the society first. To illustrate, Sindh - a province of pakistan - in 1980 had people with no quality food and water.
people drink dirty water to fulfill their thrust. if this is the case, then it is morally acceptable to first work on people's quality of
life than participating in the space race. To conclude, if the situation is worst than humanitarian projects deserve to be on the top.
In contrast, if a country has a good Gross Domestic Product and its people have a better quality of living, then the reduction in funds in science projects is not justified. For example, India is working on science projects and have a not-so-good quality of living. making its route to space is a good move. In my opinion, one should consider their situation first that how much it is important to reduce funds and should find alternative ways
of funding as well by making a priority of all programs.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Be
...the funds for science projects should be reduced to increase funds for humanitar...
^^
Line 5, column 188, Rule ID: ALSO_OTHER[1]
Message: Use simply 'there are other' or 'there are also'
Suggestion: there are other; there are also
...e funds for science projects. Moreover, there are also other ways to fund humanitarian projects in...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Instead
...er ways to fund humanitarian projects instead of reducing the budget for projects lik...
^^^^^^^
Line 15, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Contribute
... of society - free education programs contribute more than programs that provide loans, ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 15, column 384, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...ely- including pakistans space program. it is a common strategy to make a priority...
^^
Line 23, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Projects
...of life, should focus on humanitarian projects to uplift the society first. To illustr...
^^^^^^^^
Line 25, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: People
...eople with no quality food and water. people drink dirty water to fulfill their thru...
^^^^^^
Line 25, column 51, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...nk dirty water to fulfill their thrust. if this is the case, then it is morally ac...
^^
Line 27, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Life
...e to first work on peoples quality of life than participating in the space race. T...
^^^^
Line 27, column 77, Rule ID: WORST_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'worse'?
Suggestion: worse
... race. To conclude, if the situation is worst than humanitarian projects deserve to b...
^^^^^
Line 33, column 267, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Making
...d have a not-so-good quality of living. making its route to space is a good move. In m...
^^^^^^
Line 35, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Of
...unds and should find alternative ways of funding as well by making a priority of...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, thus, well, for example, for instance, in contrast, in short, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 33.0505617978 48% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2168.0 2235.4752809 97% => OK
No of words: 413.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24939467312 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81454526096 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 215.323595506 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.491525423729 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 704.065955056 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.0577561415 60.3974514979 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.105263158 118.986275619 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7368421053 23.4991977007 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.63157894737 5.21951772744 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 12.0 4.97078651685 241% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 12.0 7.80617977528 154% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.272667248524 0.243740707755 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0955738616847 0.0831039109588 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0815624458818 0.0758088955206 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105058907675 0.150359130593 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0813401701792 0.0667264976115 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.