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 y

Essay topics:

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.

The statement that governments should focus on immediate problems rather than on future problems is too categorical. In my opinion, governments should solve the immediate problems first, and then solve the future problems. Both of them should be valued, just differing in their priorities.

In a democratic nation, governments are elected. They are appointed by the nationals to help them solve problems. People want the government to solve the immediate problems they encounter, such as a high crime rate, economic stagnation, etc. Therefore, if the government fails to solve these problems, they are not living up to the peoples’ anticipation and should step down due to their incapability to solve the peoples’ immediate needs.

However, some people may argue that if governments put too much attention on immediate, and probably minor, issues, they are unable to make policies that are good for the long-term welfare of its people. In reality, solving immediate problems first isn’t equivalent to ignoring long-term development. If a country can’t solve immediate issues, then it will likely be swamped in a lot of economic and social problems and is unable to develop a grand project that can solve the anticipated problems of the future. In Taiwan, there were voices of environmental protection decades ago. They objected to the construction of nuclear power plants, worrying that the nuclear waste these plants produced would have a detrimental effect on the environment. The government was aware of this issue. However, it still decided to build four nuclear power plants because there were 2.3 million people in Taiwan, and the power consumption each year was incredibly high. To solve the immediate issue of electricity shortage, the government had to postpone the construction of power plants that produce green energy. Now, technology has improved, and the problem of power shortage is alleviated, so the government is building some greener power plants using wind, sea, or the sun.

On the other hand, if a government only focuses on short-term problems that appeal to the immediate needs of its people. In the long term, more problems will arise. Take China, for example. After the second world war, China was plagued by poverty. The government decided to make more money, hoping this would solve the problem. On the contrary, this act led to inflation, and people got poorer. The money they got today might be worthless tomorrow. As soon as they got their wages, they ran to buy a lot of commodities. The whole country was not only more impoverished but also more restless. Finally, this brought about another war. The government changed, and the new government decided to boost the economy by a lot of long-term economic stimuli and policies. Thus, the problem was resolved.

Governments should solve the immediate problems first, and then solve the future problems. Both of them should be valued, just differing in their priorities.

Votes
Average: 5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 441, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to solve the peoples’ immediate needs. However, some people may argue that if g...
^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, still, then, therefore, thus, for example, such as, in my opinion, on the contrary, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 12.9106741573 155% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2496.0 2235.4752809 112% => OK
No of words: 476.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24369747899 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67091256922 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76906057903 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 215.323595506 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483193277311 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 756.9 704.065955056 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.77640449438 450% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.3964626377 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.2 118.986275619 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8666666667 23.4991977007 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.26666666667 5.21951772744 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 5.13820224719 292% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.287850570813 0.243740707755 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0859685270312 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10017018527 0.0758088955206 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215271320203 0.150359130593 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0840091661482 0.0667264976115 126% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 14.1392134831 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.8420337079 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 100.480337079 104% => 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.