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.
In the contemporary day and age, there is a war of words regarding the belief that government should only act on present problems rather than the problems that might happen in future. An equal number of people comes in favour of the very notion, however, others are hesitant to it. The following paragraphs, would cast light on my personal perspective along with an apt example.
I partially welcome the statement that governent should work only on immediate problems than the problems that might emerge in future. The reason responsible for my opinion is that if government don’t focus on immediate problems than problems will get accumulated and nothing will be resolved. For example, pandemic is going on because of spread of a deadly virus and to get rid of this situation the governemt is deciding to start the research and developement on vaccine. But government is delaying in taking decision because they are also thinking if people would not like to get vaccinated because of the side effects which appears after taking vaccine or government won’t be able to afford the vaccine distribution cost all over the country. Therefore the tolls of infected and death people increases. The above example illustrates that delaying decision because of the problems that may or may not emerge will only create more problems.
On second thought there is a reason that drive me to consider the opposite notion as well. If the government include various future problems that might emerge while taking decisions on present problems then this would lead to a better and more flexible outcome. For example, a software engineer is developing a website with a specific requirement. If the engineer develops a website that will be containing dynamic components which are compatible with the future requirements so it will be considered as better solution. The above example illustrates that including future problems while taking decisions will be feasible in future also and will help to save time and money.
Taking everything into account, I personally feel that although looking over the problems that may happen in future can help to create a better solution for present and future situations, yet the downside should not be overlooked.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 195, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...le for my opinion is that if government dont focus on immediate problems than proble...
^^^^
Line 5, column 390, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...e engineer develops a website that will be containing dynamic components which are compatible...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, may, regarding, second, so, then, therefore, well, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1850.0 2235.4752809 83% => OK
No of words: 365.0 442.535393258 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06849315068 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64654698076 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 215.323595506 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.47397260274 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 594.9 704.065955056 84% => 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: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 1.0 20.2370786517 5% => 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: 365.0 23.0359550562 1584% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 0.0 60.3974514979 0% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 1850.0 118.986275619 1555% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 365.0 23.4991977007 1553% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 99.0 5.21951772744 1897% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 10.2758426966 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221308712602 0.243740707755 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.221308712602 0.0831039109588 266% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0758088955206 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136781412111 0.150359130593 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0366489189498 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 184.9 14.1392134831 1308% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -299.0 48.8420337079 -612% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 0.0 7.92365168539 0% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 145.6 12.1743820225 1196% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 13.61 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 24.94 8.38706741573 297% => Dale chall readability score is high.
difficult_words: 74.0 100.480337079 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 53.0 11.8971910112 445% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 148.0 11.2143820225 1320% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 185.0 11.7820224719 1570% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
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.