It is true that there is a decline in the price of consumer goods these days. While there are some benefits to purchasing more cost-efficient items, I maintain that the demerits of this tendency will be more dominant than the merits.
On the one hand, the idea of buying more economical products is beneficial to some extent. First and foremost, if the costs of food, clothing, and domestic items become cheaper, customers can save a huge amount of money. Therefore, they can allocate this saving budget for facilitating better healthcare and more efficient access to knowledge by taking more educational courses. Moreover, the lower good price will help to enhance the sale of mass-produced items. As more and more people will have the sufficient financial capacity to buy these low-priced freights, the profits of commercial corporations will be boosted considerably. As a result, this trend will help promote business growth as well as the national economy as a whole.
On the other hand, there are two fundamental drawbacks derived from this phenomenon. The first downside is that the decrease in product price means the quality of the items will not be guaranteed. As companies will utilize cheap and low-qualified materials for the manufacturing process to produce products at lower prices. Furthermore, when an increasing number of cheap goods are manufactured, it will lead to the prevalence of a “throw-away”society which means that people will use the products for a short period and then throw them away. Consequently, these disposed items will be released to the environment and lead to severe environmental issues such as overwhelming landfills or serious soil pollution.
In conclusion, while some maintain that making the price of goods more affordable will help people save a lot of money as well as boost both individual businesses and national economy development, I contend its lower product quality and the adverse impacts on the environment should be more concerned. In my opinion, the upsides of cheaper goods overwhelm the aforementioned downsides.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 444, Rule ID: NO_SPACE_CLOSING_QUOTE[1]
Message: There should be a space after a closing quote.
Suggestion: ” society
... lead to the prevalence of a “throw-away”society which means that people will use the pr...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, in my opinion, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 7.0 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 1.00243902439 1397% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 20.0 5.60731707317 357% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1758.0 965.302439024 182% => OK
No of words: 331.0 196.424390244 169% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31117824773 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 3.73543355544 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12679334912 2.65546596893 118% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 106.607317073 174% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558912386707 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 550.8 283.868780488 194% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 1.53170731707 457% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 1.07073170732 654% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 8.94146341463 168% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.6626069382 43.030603864 139% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.2 112.824112599 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0666666667 22.9334400587 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.6666666667 5.23603664747 223% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 3.70975609756 297% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 1.13902439024 351% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.09268292683 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.100213704681 0.215688989381 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0366219041085 0.103423049105 35% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.034139708454 0.0843802449381 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0600952100408 0.15604864568 39% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0390473426932 0.0819641961636 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.2329268293 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 61.2550243902 66% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.3012195122 127% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.06136585366 120% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 40.7170731707 253% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 444, Rule ID: NO_SPACE_CLOSING_QUOTE[1]
Message: There should be a space after a closing quote.
Suggestion: ” society
... lead to the prevalence of a “throw-away”society which means that people will use the pr...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, in my opinion, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 7.0 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 1.00243902439 1397% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 20.0 5.60731707317 357% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1758.0 965.302439024 182% => OK
No of words: 331.0 196.424390244 169% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31117824773 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 3.73543355544 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12679334912 2.65546596893 118% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 106.607317073 174% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558912386707 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 550.8 283.868780488 194% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 1.53170731707 457% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 1.07073170732 654% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 8.94146341463 168% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.6626069382 43.030603864 139% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.2 112.824112599 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0666666667 22.9334400587 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.6666666667 5.23603664747 223% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 3.70975609756 297% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 1.13902439024 351% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.09268292683 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.100213704681 0.215688989381 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0366219041085 0.103423049105 35% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.034139708454 0.0843802449381 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0600952100408 0.15604864568 39% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0390473426932 0.0819641961636 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.2329268293 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 61.2550243902 66% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.3012195122 127% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.06136585366 120% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 40.7170731707 253% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.