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.
A philosophy's assertion states that new problems always arise from the old ones as human attempts to solve conflicts within each problem. It implies that having anticipated problems in the future, it would be wiser to tackle present matters in order to mitigate their consequences. A look back at the world's efforts to solve immediate problems underlines the veracity of the statement.
Current Ebola disease is a clear example to emphasize the needs to address problems immediately. The deadly virus has caused large number of casualties and the WHO has alerted its danger at the worldwide scale. If the world is not tackling this problem seriously, the consequences will be limitless and severe. Obviously, human is still working to combat the increasingly forecast number of other lethal diseases like cancers. However, the urgency to qualify the Ebola outbreak certainly outweighs other future concerns.
Another case should be brought to discussion within this issue is the world's fighting against poverty. It has long been an arduous concern for governments to eradicate hunger and improve living standards. The United Nations even upholds the mission as one of The Millennium Goals. Undeniably, the efforts have been being carried out for decades, yet reports of food and shelter shortage come in relentlessly from every corner of the world. This is a solid evidence to challenge the governments' actions to tackle anticipated matters ineffectively.
Turn a glance at the ways that governments acted on the global financial crisis is another concrete proof supporting the statement. The U.S. government resolutely carried out the quantitative easing plan that lasted for many years, while the European Central Bank cut interest rates aggressively. These were determined actions that reversed the economic downturn. Should the matter have not been handled pressingly by that time, the world's economy might still struggle for positive growth in the presence. Once again, the case implies that serious actions to solve immediate problems are vital to restrain their forward consequences.
Inevitably, human always needs to solve problems to make significant developments, either now or in the future. However, governments should give priority to solve present matters, which pose great obstacles to the ongoing progress of development. The evidences presented above clearly support and strengthen the statement.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 434, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'worlds'' or 'world's'?
Suggestion: worlds'; world's
...en handled pressingly by that time, the worlds economy might still struggle for positi...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, look, so, still, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 58.6224719101 75% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2056.0 2235.4752809 92% => OK
No of words: 371.0 442.535393258 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.54177897574 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.812538985 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614555256065 0.4932671777 125% => OK
syllable_count: 630.9 704.065955056 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => 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: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.0377364381 60.3974514979 43% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 97.9047619048 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6666666667 23.4991977007 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.95238095238 5.21951772744 37% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.199851373149 0.243740707755 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0531847873794 0.0831039109588 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0555385616798 0.0758088955206 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114712478059 0.150359130593 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0674858300586 0.0667264976115 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.38706741573 117% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 100.480337079 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.