Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed.
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.
This topic raises the controversial issue of whether resources should be transferred from the art sector to unemployed and hungry people. In some extreme scenario, like during wartime, it could be true but usually it is not a well-designed policy. Governments should not suspend transfers to the art sector when employment rate is low or when a large share of the population lacks primary resources. The proposed recommendation could have a negative net effect in terms of unemployment and it could turn out to be only a temporary solution.
The main reason which leads me to reject the above recommendation is the possibility that, if the above recommendation is in place, the net effect of the policy on the population could be negative. Indeed, if governments allow to suspend funding for the art sector in order to transfer those resources to unemployed and hungry people, the working force of the art sector could be negatively hit by this policy. It is certainly true that the amount of resources taken from the art sector and moved to fund unemployed and hungry citizens can make them better off. However, it is certainly true as well that citizens working for the art sector will likely become unemployed because of lack of resources for the entities they work for. In fact, it often happens that museums, theatres and galleries are no-profit organizations for which governments funding represents a large share of their revenues. Therefore, it could be extremely hard for them to earn enough money to pay wages for their workforce. Moreover, if we think about countries whose GDP is largely produced by their art sectors, for instance Italy, Spain and France, the net effect of the policy is even worse. In those countries tourism is extremely linked to their cultural and art heritage sectors. Therefore, a lack of resources for the art sector would imply a reduction in tourism activity: the policy will propagate the negative effects in two different sectors of the economy and not solely in the cultural sector.
In addition, the recommendation is likely to be just a transitory solution to a structural problem. Unemployment and lack of food to some part of the population are usually a fundamental and not transitory problems of a country. However, the solution proposed is likely to generate only short-term benefits if in place. To expand the point on the previous section, to suspend government funding for the art sector and donate these resources to unemployed and hungry citizens will certainly reduce the rate of unemployment but only in the short-term. In fact, as the lack of resources in the art’s sector starts to be evident the rate of unemployment will rise again, and the government will face the same problem. Should they cut transfers for other sectors? It is clear that the policy could, in the best scenario, only induce short-term benefits. What it is needed is a structural reform for the economy in order to definitely solve those issues. For instance, nations should elaborate policy to increase permanently the number of jobs available in the economy.
However, the above recommendation could be the right strategy in very extreme and specific circumstances. In wartime people change their consumption behavior. Indeed, citizens tend to cut any expense on goods and services which are not primary goods in order to save more money for foods. Therefore, in this extreme scenario, since the demand for the art sector is likely to be depressed during wartime, the policy could have a net positive effect on population.
In conclusion, the recommendation has two main drawbacks: it is likely to be just a transitory solution to fundamental problems and it is likely to generate a negative net effect on the economy if in place in normal times.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 228, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'suspending'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'allow' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: suspending
... negative. Indeed, if governments allow to suspend funding for the art sector in order to ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1181, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'countries'' or 'country's'?
Suggestion: countries'; country's
...t of the policy is even worse. In those countries tourism is extremely linked to their cu...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.5258426966 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 89.0 58.6224719101 152% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 12.9106741573 209% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3175.0 2235.4752809 142% => OK
No of words: 628.0 442.535393258 142% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.05573248408 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.00598923014 4.55969084622 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88439887788 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.40127388535 0.4932671777 81% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1016.1 704.065955056 144% => 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: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 13.0 4.38483146067 296% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.6286069546 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.592592593 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2592592593 23.4991977007 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.62962962963 5.21951772744 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 5.13820224719 272% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19507572447 0.243740707755 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0611302075657 0.0831039109588 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0451122545957 0.0758088955206 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10803623275 0.150359130593 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0567661260994 0.0667264976115 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.