Arts and artists are one of the most important parts of a society. Some people believe that government funding is obligatory to ensure arts advancement and bunches of people can see their masterpieces too. Nonetheless, other people think that the fund usually allocated to the tricky plan and so the government should never subsidize them. Personally speaking, I believe that government funding facilitate art progression and in what follows the most discernible reasons are drawn.
First and foremost, the home of arts are in poor parts of a country. Commonly, parsimonious persons try to draw handcrafts or sing songs to become popular and afford their expenses. However, despite of their outstanding pieces, most of them remain unpopular. So, the governments can play a vital role in this part by assigning appropriate funds to their job. In this shape, an artist, gradually achieve progress, tries to get more comment on his masterpieces, fixing his/her defects and finally flourish his/her talents. This is only due to the reason that they get rid of their monetary matter and start to just think about their arts. Hence, governmental fund can lay a solid foundation to flourish artists' talent.
Another reason which deserves some words to mention is that, by the usage of governmental fund, they could cover all the expenses and focus on popularity. Indeed, each time they hope to become popular and demonstrate their job publicity like, art galleries, concerts, exhibitions, orchestras and so forth. The preponderance of people in these circumstances--art places-- would guarantee high income and happiness. People make happy of the art and government can benefit through ticket. Hence, after a while the money comes back to the government budget and if we consider this period long, we can see than without expenditure, an artist is displayed to country. Therefore, an artist flourishes his/her talents without considerable expenditure since the money comes back in long term.
Notwithstanding to the profit of government funding on artists, some scholars and scientists believe that the fund could be allocated to other parts for subjective purposes. Indeed, one person can take the money for art purposes and expend it for other jobs such as, Construction Company, real state, marketing, etc. These are fraudulent plans that researchers have premonition about and believe that governmental fund would not be allotted to the arts.
All in all, as the above-mentioned examples have illustrated, it seems more reasonable to the government to assign funds for flourishing and promoting artists’ talent. In this regard, also the money would come back in large scale. However, the plan has some drawbacks such as sneaky plans which the governments should think about.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, however, if, nonetheless, so, therefore, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2343.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 440.0 442.535393258 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.325 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57997565096 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93675676372 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 215.323595506 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 705.6 704.065955056 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.1684778525 60.3974514979 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 101.869565217 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1304347826 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.65217391304 5.21951772744 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.38508042891 0.243740707755 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112081851074 0.0831039109588 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0941268592728 0.0758088955206 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.235291154692 0.150359130593 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106565095572 0.0667264976115 160% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 100.480337079 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => 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.