Some people claim that the goal of politics should be the pursuit of an ideal. Others argue that the goal should be finding common ground and reaching reasonable consensus.Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own

Policy, which alleviates the elementary problems of the society, are necessary to be implemented for the striving of the nations. However, during the formulation of it, fervor argument develops between the politician and policy maker- should our political goal be based on the idealism or realistic? Evaluating the both sides, the policy depended on common grounds are likely to be successful, prevents the further suffering of citizen and leads to faster development of a country.

Quixotic goal, unlike real goal, are appealing when some politician gives speech about it, their goal seems grandiose, but rarely are achieved because in idealistic goal various parameter helping to shape an aim are trifle compared to actual need of parameter for achieving such goal. Nepal is reach in hydro resource, for instance, it has potential to generate upto 1200 Megawatt electricity. However, since the country lacks various infrastructure- funding, technical man power- and potential water resources are located in inaccessible areas, it is hard for Nepal to achieve optimum utilization of water resources. However, policy to harness the full power of resources has been implemented for 20 years and completion rate is not more than 5 percent. Instead, if policy makers had focused only on the accessible, low funding resources, the hydro electricity production would have been higher now. The achievement success is higher in goals based on sound reasoning and grounds rather than idealistic goal.

Furthermore, if any politician is obsessed with their grandiose plan and policy, then it will prompt many suffering to citizen. if a country, for example, where higher power personnel wants to increase their military power despite poor economic condition of country, then the citizen will suffer from dire fate. They have to pay higher tax, other facilities such as health, education-character for promoting quality of life- are focused insignificantly by government. Because it is supposed that North Korea spends large amount of budget in military personnel, we heard about suffering of many north- Korean people. Similarly, During the construction of Taaj-mahal, which was a grandiose plan, requiring enormous amount of capital and took 30 years for completion, most citizen had to pay high taxes, gave higher portion of harvest, causing them to live a miserable life. It also emptied the state money and subverted defensive power, thus making country vulnerable to attack and other havoc in country.

However, some may argue that quixotic goals are example of something unachievable, making the people believe that everything is possible. However, to achieve such goals, insurmountable of resources are required, so such aim are barely successful. If we compare successfulness between goal achieved on reasonable grounds and ideal grounds, then measure of grounds based aim are much higher than the latter. Therefore, for the rapid development of any country, society or community, policy maker should focus on reasonable grounds.

In conclusion, quixotic goals can hardly be achieved, obscures basic need of people, causing them to live in tribulation, but reasoned based goals aid in developing of the country as it has high success rate. Therefore, Politician, I believe that, should focus on policy hinged on realistic grounds.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (4 votes)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 129, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
... will prompt many suffering to citizen. if a country, for example, where higher po...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, similarly, so, then, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2828.0 2235.4752809 127% => OK
No of words: 516.0 442.535393258 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.48062015504 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76609204519 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90464764576 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 288.0 215.323595506 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558139534884 0.4932671777 113% => OK
syllable_count: 893.7 704.065955056 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.98053665 60.3974514979 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.666666667 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5714285714 23.4991977007 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.14285714286 5.21951772744 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
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: 0.204038368732 0.243740707755 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0589972757055 0.0831039109588 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0554892326948 0.0758088955206 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126357935836 0.150359130593 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0551044728985 0.0667264976115 83% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 14.1392134831 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.45 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 151.0 100.480337079 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.