Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Stating that even Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their state, even if the areas could be developed for economic gain, this view claims that a nation should more importantly consider give natural inheritance to descendant rather than factorial success. In some senses, it is true that we must keep the ecosystem. In my opinion, however, considring a poor countries and the land is a private property it is proper legistlation
Of course, few would disagree that the government have to preserve the nature. Many animal and plant species have been killed by human activity and development of the area to some degree which the mother nature can recover herself. For example, the rate of extinction of species has been accelerated by using fossil energy. This rate is uncommonly fast comparing with naturally occurred extinction in history of the Earth. This implies that our governments have duty for protecting our homeland.
However, it does not always mean that the absolute protection policy is always better than developing wilderness areas. In the poorest countries over the world, the governments cannot improve their economy state without destroing their forest. For example, in 1960s, Korea was one of the poorest countries in the world. The government decided to develop forests and built factories to enhance the industry. As a result, Korea become a nation which was ranked as 10th by GDP nowadays. This implies that forcing to preserve their nature to poor countries is short-sighted
Moreover, in a circumstance which the land is a private property, limiting use of the land transgresses the basic characteristic of democracy and capitalism. There is no right for governments to restrict an individual's economic activity, even if the state make compensation for the limit, the value is could be lower than its real value when it sold or developed. This shows that the using of the individual's property is up to one's decision not government, even if the property is the natural environment.
To summarize, preserving the nature is one of the central roles of the governments. In terms of improving standard of living in poor nation or basic spirit of democracy and capitalism about one's property, however, to limit development of using the lands is not proper and superfluous activity for government.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 259, Rule ID: IN_1990s[1]
Message: The article is probably missing here: 'in the 1960s'.
Suggestion: in the 1960s
...ut destroing their forest. For example, in 1960s, Korea was one of the poorest countries...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 512, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'preserving'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'force' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: preserving
...GDP nowadays. This implies that forcing to preserve their nature to poor countries is short...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 205, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'an individual' or simply 'individuals'?
Suggestion: an individual; individuals
...is no right for governments to restrict an individuals economic activity, even if the state ma...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 300, Rule ID: IS_SHOULD[1]
Message: Did you mean 'it'?
Suggestion: it
...e compensation for the limit, the value is could be lower than its real value when...
^^
Line 7, column 398, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...loped. This shows that the using of the individuals property is up to ones decision not gov...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 191, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...pirit of democracy and capitalism about ones property, however, to limit development...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, moreover, so, for example, of course, as a result, in my opinion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1981.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 381.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19947506562 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8664734024 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 215.323595506 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.524934383202 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 621.9 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.0941745599 60.3974514979 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.529411765 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4117647059 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.23529411765 5.21951772744 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.383641822243 0.243740707755 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0949399100485 0.0831039109588 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.152403429956 0.0758088955206 201% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204720636807 0.150359130593 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.170292877571 0.0667264976115 255% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.1392134831 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => 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.