Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Though scandals transiently focus our attention on the cause of a problem, they are not useful because scandals cause huge loss of money and promote corruption.
Most scandals cause squandering of money. For instance, in India, a few years ago, the coal block allocation scam was exposed by CAG ( Comptroller and auditor general of India). This embezzlement of money was around 200 million INR. Culprits were able to commit this because they leveraged a loophole in the coal block allocation system. A person entrusted with allocating coal mines would often give it to their relatives or another business magnate at a much cheaper price than its actual price. This loophole in the allocation system has now been identified and nowadays government tenders coalmines through an online portal. Removing middleman left little scope for improvement. These de-merits of laws could have rectified earlier without waiting for some huge scandal taking place.
Culpable people often get away with their scam in countries where protector of laws remiss their duty. Scandals only exacerbate the already rife corruption. When culprits get away without punishment, it gives other venial individuals, a wrong message. For example, a politician who squanders a public funds gets away with economic offense or when the punishment is not commensurate to the economic offense they commit, it reinforces their habit do scandals again and again.
In conclusions, Scandals does more harm than good because they lead to loss of money and promotes corruption.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 127, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...block allocation scam was exposed by CAG Comptroller and auditor general of India...
^^
Line 2, column 212, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...his embezzlement of money was around 200 million INR. Culprits were able to commi...
^^
Line 3, column 348, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... gets away with economic offense or when the punishment is not commensurate to th...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 19.5258426966 31% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 12.4196629213 16% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 58.6224719101 46% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1289.0 2235.4752809 58% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 236.0 442.535393258 53% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46186440678 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91947592106 4.55969084622 86% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67762749951 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 215.323595506 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.677966101695 0.4932671777 137% => OK
syllable_count: 396.0 704.065955056 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.6376630281 60.3974514979 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.0714285714 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8571428571 23.4991977007 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.42857142857 5.21951772744 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
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: 0.115671066931 0.243740707755 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0381222174009 0.0831039109588 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0507347579451 0.0758088955206 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0919720415618 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0638897258397 0.0667264976115 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.1392134831 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.09 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 100.480337079 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.