Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.
The issue of whether or not the government should focus on solving immediate problems today rather than solving anticipated problems is a contentious one. Each side has its own positives and negatives that can be debatable. But solving the existing issues can ease and eliminate pressure on the government, help the government to maintain a systematic society and enhance better planning to face upcoming issues. There are many examples raised during the COVID situation that can be used to support that the government has neglected to take proper action and was trying to solve anticipated problems.
Firstly, solving immediate problems helps the government to better plan and be ready to tackle any unknown and sudden events that can be raised in the immediate future. No one knows what’s going to happen next. Indian government experienced such an issue while dealing with the COVID. It was slowly dealing with the issue rather than bringing a quick plan of action. Meanwhile, there was a cyclone tauktae that bought a disaster. The government was busy planning on tackling the cyclone and ignored the covid situation. That is the time where they neglected the present situation and experienced a huge rise in the COVID cases.
Secondly, The government should quickly solve an existing problem to establish a systematic society and reduce the chaos. There are many countries that experienced chaos due to this ignorance. The black lives matter movement is one such example. It was the time where The United States was experiencing a raise of minimum of 2 lakhs cases per day. The incident of black lives matter suddenly came into the picture. A lot of chaos was created and the government who had to control it didn't care about the situation until people started protesting. If immediate action would have taken that would have stopped this protest and have control the increase in COVID cases.
When the government solves an immediate problem it can eliminate a lot of stress that can be raised due to the issue. Solving an existing problem can be of less a burden than ignoring it and trying to solve the problem that may exist in the future. West Bengal, in India, wanted to conduct an election during COVID and each contestant had their own popularity and was raising the interest by challenging each other. This tension created a lot of enthusiasm among people and they started to come onto the roads as if there was no corona. But postponing the elections might have helped many people suffering and dying from the corona.
Although, there might be some bigger issues that may arise in the future. But no one knows the chances of them occurring. They might or might not occur. The government simply working on prediction might create havoc in the system.
If a small problem is left unsolved that can be a bigger problem in the future. The Government of India after May 2020 thought that the country may not require another lockdown because the cases were controlled and the GDP of the country has fallen badly. But surprisingly it has to restrict people to follow lockdown again in cities like Maharashtra to avoid an increase in the cases. If the government was not worried about the future GDP and strictly implemented lockdown where there was a small rise in the average cases, India would not have experienced such a situation.
Finally, trying to solve a problem immediately can lessen the burden and can ensure the safe and smooth functioning of the government. Reduce the pressure that can arise for sudden tension in the people and help the government to plan better. Solving a problem that may or may not exist is definitely not more important than solving an immediate problem.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 14, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
The issue of whether or not the government should focus on solving ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 484, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...nd the government who had to control it didnt care about the situation until people s...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 568, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had taken'?
Suggestion: had taken
...started protesting. If immediate action would have taken that would have stopped this protest an...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “When” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...control the increase in COVID cases. When the government solves an immediate prob...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...suffering and dying from the corona. Although, there might be some bigger issues that...
^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...n might create havoc in the system. If a small problem is left unsolved that c...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, thus, while, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 27.0 12.4196629213 217% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 28.0 14.8657303371 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3095.0 2235.4752809 138% => OK
No of words: 625.0 442.535393258 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.952 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.0 4.55969084622 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55279686618 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 263.0 215.323595506 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.4208 0.4932671777 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 961.2 704.065955056 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 34.0 20.2370786517 168% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.8029560867 60.3974514979 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0294117647 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3823529412 23.4991977007 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.32352941176 5.21951772744 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 7.0 4.97078651685 141% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 18.0 5.13820224719 350% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.375502446749 0.243740707755 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0924619128361 0.0831039109588 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.152184940249 0.0758088955206 201% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202171569021 0.150359130593 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.14073015094 0.0667264976115 211% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.1392134831 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.79 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 100.480337079 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.