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 call for focusing on the immediate problems to be solved rather than the anticepated future problems. This statement is not always true as it could be invalidated through a set of evidences.
For instance, the immediate problems may have long term negative effect which could be control on any interval of time since it’s initiation. Perhaps even a certain unexpected immediate raised problem is not a big deal to be controled and solved later on, allowing a proper time of developing proper solution of an expected bigger problem which could be clasified as a type of disasters. Thus, the statement call is invalid under this given circumstances.
Furthermore, an unexpected revealed kind of future problems could be simply solved or circumnavigated by a simple non-costly procedures at the moment but would need huge financial support and high precaution if it is neglected untill it is about to take place. Then it is more logic to focus on future unexpected raised problems rather than any other kind of problems in order to guarantee stabilized planed strategies without any unstudied obstacles. Then, the addressed statement is protrayed as inproper recommendation to be followed.
Conversely, some critics maybe concerned with immediate problems as it’s neglecting and it’s accomulating would be a serious alert of a bigger disaster in the near future. So these critics recommend to focus on these immediate problems to avoid it’s accomulation and avoid any further unexpected problems.
This perspective is true but conditionally, as it is not always happening that simple dialy basis commonplace small kind of immediate problems would be left without any progressive procedures to develop proper solutions even on long term in a proper successful governmental experts who could manage the ordinary daily basis matters. Consequently, the proposed recommendation of this statement is invalid in major, and could be only valid under certain conditions.
These previously illustrated evidences are a sample of a set of evidences that enable proper evaluation of the addressed statement recommendation and reveal it’s invalidity with respect to the common expected circumstance.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nvalidated through a set of evidences. For instance, the immediate problems may...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nvalid under this given circumstances. Furthermore, an unexpected revealed kind...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nproper recommendation to be followed. Conversely, some critics maybe concerned...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...void any further unexpected problems. This perspective is true but conditional...
^^^
Line 5, column 146, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onplace small kind of immediate problems would be left without any progressive pr...
^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e only valid under certain conditions. These previously illustrated evidences a...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, conversely, furthermore, if, may, so, then, thus, for instance, kind of, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1887.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 342.0 442.535393258 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.51754385965 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15737081424 2.79657885939 113% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 215.323595506 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.511695906433 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 609.3 704.065955056 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => 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: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.8769636284 60.3974514979 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.153846154 118.986275619 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3076923077 23.4991977007 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.23076923077 5.21951772744 158% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163683439679 0.243740707755 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0665738399927 0.0831039109588 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0645107439913 0.0758088955206 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0922200310083 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0499470910342 0.0667264976115 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 14.1392134831 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.17 48.8420337079 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.1743820225 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.1639044944 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.45 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 100.480337079 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.7820224719 136% => 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.