In this memo, the speaker claims that government officials should base decisions on their own decision rather than relying on the will of the people they serve. At first glance, the claim seems paradoxical since existence of government is based on the purpose for serving their society, nevertheless, the explanation has some merit to adhere as a whole.
To begin with, the claim is assuming the people they serve have fair reasonability to judge most government decisions correctly. However, it is a hasty assumption to support, since not all people they serve have the same background and wills of protecting their benefits. The occurrence of social conflicts or riots are easily witnessed when two sides of people have different will for their own sake. In this case, the role of government retains the compromising skill by inducing presumably the most hopeful solution, and such actions are credible enough when professional negotiators are involved. For example, subway industry strikes, which is one of the most frequently occurring conflicts in major cities throughout the world, provides immediate inconvenience to commuters and government usually involves in this strike situation to support the company negotiation. As government officials are conversant with similar cases, they could perform tactically and provide guidelines or schedules to reduce the inconvenience. Of course, their actions could be based on the will for the people they serve, however, still it is undeniable that they are the ones who make the actual decisions. Therefore, in some exigent cases, the government officials have to show their power based on their own judgments.
Nevertheless, governments are always should be monitored by the people as they have the actual influential role in running our society, thus government officials are recognized as the ones with power. Those in power sometimes are shown to be corrupted and the history of corruption is still pervasive. Philippine government used to be colluding with drug cartells for centuries and as citizens rioted to save their own lives from those malign figures and conditions, this country has chose a currently and supposedly powerful president to stop this disastrous drug situation. By sentencing death whomever is involved with drug, the nation has become relatively stable than before now. In this case, it can be said that the significance of carrying out the will of people is effective enough to preclude national corruption.
However, it is mystery whether government should always follow the tacit rule of satiating their people’s wills. Human beings have the face of selfishness and people work out to aggregate their benefits every time and this is why real estate speculation, which is one of the most struggling social problem, persistently appears. In this case, a strong regulation is necessitate to restrict and this why the government officials are important to make their acts by their own decisions. If their decisions are based on people’s will, such real estate speculation won’t likely to be regulated effectively and eventually will threaten a lot of residential rights.
In sum, the claim seems unpersuasive as it stands. While at first glance, it seems mutually exclusive since the exitence of government stands with representing their people’s wills, however, it appears to be not. Since not all people are reasonable enough to enhance the social status effectively, thus leaving to the professionals who are chosen to be the government officials could be more effective by letting them to decide by their own judgments. Yet, as they are the ones with power, people should not be reluctant to monitor them occasionally.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n has some merit to adhere as a whole. To begin with, the claim is assuming the...
^^^
Line 5, column 218, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[4]
Message: The adverb 'sometimes' is usually put after the verb 'are'.
Suggestion: are sometimes
... as the ones with power. Those in power sometimes are shown to be corrupted and the history o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 486, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'chosen'.
Suggestion: chosen
...igures and conditions, this country has chose a currently and supposedly powerful pre...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 373, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'necessitated'.
Suggestion: necessitated
...s. In this case, a strong regulation is necessitate to restrict and this why the government...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, nevertheless, so, still, therefore, thus, while, for example, of course, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.5258426966 179% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 47.0 33.0505617978 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 79.0 58.6224719101 135% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 12.9106741573 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3146.0 2235.4752809 141% => OK
No of words: 586.0 442.535393258 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36860068259 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.92010537223 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94346588681 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 281.0 215.323595506 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.4795221843 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 974.7 704.065955056 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.38483146067 274% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.3105959437 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.782608696 118.986275619 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.4782608696 23.4991977007 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.60869565217 5.21951772744 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => 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: 0.385196691487 0.243740707755 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121023759589 0.0831039109588 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0981143147498 0.0758088955206 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.239323215899 0.150359130593 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.062969738826 0.0667264976115 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 151.0 100.480337079 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.