In Britain, when someone gets old they often go to live in a home with other old people where there are nurses to look after them. Sometimes the government has to pay for this care.
Who do you think should pay for this care, the government or the family?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Recently, many countries have the problem about elderly people. Therefore, it is considered by many whether the government should pay for the care or not, if old people stay in a senior centre for living.
In my opinion, I agree that government should support their living when they get old because all government have a duty to protect and support people so that elderly people live well. Furthermore, when people get old, most of elderly people have retired. So, they don't have abilities to earn money.
Meanwhile, I partly believe that family should pay for their living as well. The reason why family should pay as well is that all government have the limit of budget. If the government have to pay all of cost for the problem of their house, they will need more budget for supporting old people. As a result, it will impose numerous taxes to people. It can be clearly seen that it makes another problems.
In conclusion, even though tax increase in order to care elderly people, I totally believe that government should pay for their house. Nevertheless, it is frequently believed that it is almost impossible that government have to pay all cost of a senior centre. Thus, I think that it is the effective method that government should pay only half proportion of cost. In addition, I believe that government should provide other policy instead of paying all cost for their house. For instance, in my country, there are many policies of superannuation. Consequently, people who get old can earn money from government by superannuation as much as they paid for tax in the past. Thus, government will be able to solve this problem by this key.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 265, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...f elderly people have retired. So, they dont have abilities to earn money. Meanw...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, furthermore, if, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for instance, i think, in addition, in conclusion, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 24.0651302605 150% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 41.998997996 67% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1372.0 1615.20841683 85% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.83098591549 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64530140437 2.80592935109 94% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 176.041082164 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.478873239437 0.561755894193 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 418.5 506.74238477 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 5.43587174349 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.5699578134 49.4020404114 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.7058823529 106.682146367 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7058823529 20.7667163134 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.17647058824 7.06120827912 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.39584534404 0.244688304435 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135795284999 0.084324248473 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0886434014146 0.0667982634062 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.257448020449 0.151304729494 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.050678446123 0.056905535591 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.7 13.0946893788 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 50.2224549098 127% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.3001002004 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.44 12.4159519038 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.04 8.58950901804 82% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 78.4519038076 60% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.7795591182 74% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.