Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Should countries pass legislations to maintain any remaining wilderness localities in their unspoiled state, even if these regions could be developed for economic purposes? I tend to partially agree with the speaker's statement, and the following essay will delve into the economic and ecological aspects of the matter at hand.
When it comes to preserving natural resources at the expense of financial gains, to my way of thinking, the type of the country we are talking about in terms of its economic strength plays a crucial role. Is this country located in the developed or developing part of the globe? Is it badly suffering from high unemployment rate? Such critical questions ought to be closely examined and addressed before prioritising wildlife benefits over the economic ones. By way of illustration, in an affluent nation such as USA it seems reasonable to channel all the available legal resources into keeping wilderness areas into their rustic form, even at the expense of losing some economic opportunities. In fact, such wealthy countries with GDPs worth of trilions of dollars appear to be able to prioritise natural-financial decisions more freely.
Having mede these points, however, in the current economic climate of the world most countries are grappling with financial difficulties leaving them no room for even pondering to preserve natural wildlife. For instance, an African poor country that is suffering from poverty, unemployment and so on would be most probably tempted to set aside its ecological priorities when a Western entrepreneur decides to invest in building a manufacturing company which will require getting rid of some of wilderness localities. As a matter of fact, such nations are left with no choice but putting economic gains on the top of their agenda.
Moreover, it seems to me that the richness of a country's unspoiled wilderness areas is also a significant element. Is it a nation situated in one of the green parts of the globe like Eurpoe with some many dense forests or conversely, is it positioned in an area where wilderness regions are quite rare? A rich country in terms of enjoying wilderness areas just seems to be more capable of making ecological sacrifices for the sake of securing more job oportunities, as opposed to a nation whose only natural legacy is a limited unharmed wilderness area.
On balance, I feel that government officials and policymakers should first thoroughly consider their current economic and ecological conditions before deciding whether to preserve any remaining wilderness localities in their natural state or not.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 209, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'speakers'' or 'speaker's'?
Suggestion: speakers'; speaker's
...ses? I tend to partially agree with the speakers statement, and the following essay will...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, first, however, if, moreover, so, for instance, i feel, in fact, such as, talking about, as a matter of fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 58.6224719101 118% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2214.0 2235.4752809 99% => OK
No of words: 417.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30935251799 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5189133491 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95828605595 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 215.323595506 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553956834532 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 707.4 704.065955056 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.0360936194 60.3974514979 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.6 118.986275619 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8 23.4991977007 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.73333333333 5.21951772744 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.320077174653 0.243740707755 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101572066694 0.0831039109588 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0855219355215 0.0758088955206 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.184028648208 0.150359130593 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406885948865 0.0667264976115 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 48.8420337079 73% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 100.480337079 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.