Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.
Regarding the issue of priority of government powers, while some people assert that governments should focus on more urgent and present problems, others claim that potential future problems should be concerned first. Althtough both sides can be deemed to have some benefits with respective arguments, I am largely against the former view.
Admittedly, the assertion that instant issues take precedence over the latent problems might hold true under certain circumstances. Some exigent issues critically undermine the well-being of citizens and endanger the social stability. For instance, epidemic diseases such as Ebola virus or SARS risk thousands of lives and social security, so the government should handle these problems primarily or otherwise these issues should kill citizens and disintegrate the nation. In addition, food insecurity and malnutrition can be another example. These food crises risk a lot of lives, so they should be concerned importantly to protect people's right to life and well-being. Accordingly, based on above reasons and examples, the claim that pressing problems should take precedence over latent problems can be agreed to a certain degree.
However, potential problems also need government attentions due to their seriousness and scale. Some issues trigger potential devastating crises, thus to prevent these large-scale disaster, government attentions are necessary. For instance, environmental problems such as Global Warming and Climate Change might result Sea Level Rise and destruction of human habitats, and finally harm the survival of human race. To prevent these crisis, government-level efforts such as the Kyoto Protocol was instituted for reduction of carbon dioxide. Therefore, even if potential problems do not occur present damages, they should also be handled by government to prevent potential disaster.
Furthermore, some future problems are so serious that only government-level efforts can solve these problems, and therefore their priority over present problems can be justified. For example, problems of alternative human habitat and alternative energy are crucial expected problems of the human race. However, unlike present problems, efforts to solve these problems need large-scale and extensive efforts, such as space development programs like MER(Mars Exploration Rover) or Solar Probe. It is clear that these space development programs, to handle future habitat and energy problems, are so expensive and demanding that they can be conducted only by governmental or international powers. These necessities of government-level focuses implies that government should deal with expected critical problems first.
To sum up, while the author's claim might seem beneficial in certain conditions, in light of above counter points, I largely disagree with the author's assertion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 427, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this crisis' or 'these crises'?
Suggestion: this crisis; these crises
... the survival of human race. To prevent these crisis, government-level efforts such as the K...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 143, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ter points, I largely disagree with the authors assertion.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in addition, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2426.0 2235.4752809 109% => OK
No of words: 415.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.84578313253 5.05705443957 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9315805652 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527710843373 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 745.2 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5960865902 60.3974514979 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.684210526 118.986275619 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8421052632 23.4991977007 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.63157894737 5.21951772744 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 5.13820224719 292% => Less 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: 0.240873182856 0.243740707755 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0829622417463 0.0831039109588 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0724860343074 0.0758088955206 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128656226022 0.150359130593 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0757055997048 0.0667264976115 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 14.1392134831 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 48.8420337079 68% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.65 12.1639044944 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.62 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.7820224719 144% => 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.