In some countries, online shopping is replacing shopping in stores. Do you think it is a positive or negative development?
Nowadays, there are many homelands, shopping online is replaced shopping in real life. This essay will examine both sides of the arguments before conclusion is drawn.
Admittedly, there are some arguments in favor of shopping online is replacing shopping in stores. First, technology devices for people’s live are believed to equalize conditions opportunities among young adolescents regardless of their financial background. This shopping online support, presumably, tends not only to increase the overall market knowledge enrollment rate but also to mitigate their time to going out, which eventually promotes an egalitarian society. Second, shopping only would probably result in a greater supply of highly qualified workers, which benefits society in the long run. In fact, it is acknowledged that skilled and knowledgeable human capital is imperative to foster economic growth and technological development in any nations.
Nevertheless, the resultant problems would be far more significant than the minor one shopping online is replacing shopping in stores. First, all people using shopping apps would likely correspond with a tremendous financial strain on a country. Generating no income from product, companies could become over-reliant on the state budget for funding, meaning that there would be less input to develop other important areas such as the healthcare system and transport infrastructure. Second, all people using shopping apps would tempt many people including those who are not shopping inclined or show no interest in community when shopping in stores, thereby adding great burdens for company and government and potentially wasting time that these people could have spent pursuing more suitable shopping paths. It,instead, would be a more shopping viable option if the resources were focused on supporting people don’t have free time to going out.
In conclusion, despite the advantages of long-distance human connection and convenience, shopping online have many drawbacks than favorable points. It is, thus, hoped that netizens, especially the young generation, should consider using it sensibly while maintaining their good shopping in stores.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 810, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , instead
...ursuing more suitable shopping paths. It,instead, would be a more shopping viable option...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, nevertheless, second, so, thus, while, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1858.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 322.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.7701863354 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23607819155 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89040188463 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.633540372671 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 569.7 506.74238477 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.9846110132 49.4020404114 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.714285714 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.57142857143 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.281717468042 0.244688304435 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11510157427 0.084324248473 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11052821141 0.0667982634062 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182413553113 0.151304729494 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0332909779278 0.056905535591 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.48 12.4159519038 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.17 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 78.4519038076 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.