Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as much money as possible.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
After the ascendancy of capitalism is proven, it is commonplace nowadays to see many big corporations are thriving. While our society oftentimes feels the benefit of the rise of big corporations, such as the advancement of technology, we still have many unresolved issues that need to be addressed. Some people maintain that as big companies gain profit by exploiting the resources that the society has, both human and natural resources, they should also be responsible for the prosperity of the society and the environment that they exploit. While this assumption is ostensibly beneficial, I see two reasons why it might not be a good idea in the long run.
First, we have the problem of economic growth. According to the concept of capitalism, the sole purpose of a company is to gain profit as much as possible. This concept is what drives our economic growth so far. Making companies be responsible for these matters will only jeopardize our economic growth. Companies will not only pursue their own interest but also the overall society interest as well. This will likely hamper the performance of companies and subsequently result in slow economic growth. The best example that represents this case would be state-owned companies in a socialist country. Back then in 1960, where Indonesia was under the regime of Soekarno who aligned himself more with the socialist view, all companies were owned by the state. Since they were all state-owned, the only purpose they had was to provide prosperity to Indonesian citizens. This purpose did not stimulate the companies to innovate and make enough profit. As a result, Indonesia’s economy stagnated, and inflation rose to 600 percent. Majority of Indonesian citizen back then could not even afford a bowl of rice. What this approach achieved was exactly counterintuitive from the very purpose of the approach itself.
Second, this approach can possibly undermine authority. If a company takes care of the well-being of its citizen, it is unsurprising if it gains support from society. A company that has abundant capital resource and support from its citizen will wield huge power. Thus, it can easily propagate propaganda in society to undermine government's power if it deems advantageous for its interests. Take, for example, the case of PT.Freeport, a mining company in Papua island, Indonesia. Papua Island the most eastern major Island in Indonesia. Since it is far-flung from the capital city, its development has been slow compared to other regions. However, it has tremendous natural resources, especially gold and uranium. Among Papuans, the notion that PT.Freeport has done more for their society than the government is well circulated. As a result, local government there almost have little to no power against PT.Freeport if a scandal regarding mining permission rises as the company has support from the citizen. If the sole purpose of the company is only to gain profit, it is unlikely that it will gain such staunch supporters from its citizen. Thus, the government can stand where it is supposed to.
While it is true that if companies keep only pursuing profit and exploiting the environment, our earth could possibly turn out inhabitable in the future. However, we should not make the responsibility of protecting the environment as companies’ responsibilities. Preserving environment can be achieved if the government enacts more stringent laws regarding environmental issues. For example, the government can put sanctions on the companies who exceed the limit of carbon emission or do not manage their waste. With such scenario, the companies will have no distraction for responsibilities other than pursuing their profit as long as they obey laws. This scenario will also preclude the possibility of companies undermining the institution. For such reasons, it is best to pass the responsibility for such matters to the government.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 818, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
... state-owned, the only purpose they had was to provide prosperity to Indonesian cit...
^^^
Line 9, column 23, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'can'.
Suggestion: can
...ach itself. Second, this approach can possibly undermine authority. If a company takes...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 426, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Freeport
...ests. Take, for example, the case of PT.Freeport, a mining company in Papua island, Indo...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 749, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Freeport
...nium. Among Papuans, the notion that PT.Freeport has done more for their society than th...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 908, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Freeport
...most have little to no power against PT.Freeport if a scandal regarding mining permissio...
^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 104, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...d exploiting the environment, our earth could possibly turn out inhabitable in the future. How...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 841, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ity for such matters to the government.
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, regarding, second, so, still, then, thus, well, while, as to, for example, such as, as a result, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 55.0 33.0505617978 166% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3312.0 2235.4752809 148% => OK
No of words: 625.0 442.535393258 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2992 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.0 4.55969084622 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02179814018 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 298.0 215.323595506 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.4768 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 1037.7 704.065955056 147% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 18.0 6.24550561798 288% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 10.0 3.10617977528 322% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 36.0 20.2370786517 178% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.4033823829 60.3974514979 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.0 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3611111111 23.4991977007 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.83333333333 5.21951772744 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 10.2758426966 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.83258426966 248% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.173492900769 0.243740707755 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0413342492238 0.0831039109588 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0567260025468 0.0758088955206 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122023944939 0.150359130593 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0574929838826 0.0667264976115 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.16 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 161.0 100.480337079 160% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 11.8971910112 134% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => 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.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.