Some people prefer to provide help and support directly to those in need. Others however prefer to give money to national and international charitable organisations.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge.
Unconditional public-spiritedness has perpetually been a sought-for attribute permeating through numerous moral principles and textbooks and is evident today through the form of charity, yet how contribution should be made engenders largely divergent opinions. A line of reasoning asserts that volunteers should lend themselves to manpower for charity bodies, while others advocate monetary donations. I shall delve deeper into both notions in the upcoming paragraph before stating my standpoint in favor of the former.
Profound serviceability for humanitarian organizations is begotten through people’s direct indulgence in altruistic activities. With the participation of new volunteers from diverse backgrounds come immense manpower and an enriched pool of knowledge. This serves to compensate for personnel deficiency for certain positions that would have otherwise incurred hiring charges on the organization, and aid crucial decision-making. In addition, such contributory activities are more accessible by the general public, especially those with abundant time reserves rather than a privilege for only the better off. More importantly, volunteer work also presents golden opportunities to gain not only life experience and maturity for younger people, but also to raise their awareness of others’ sufferings and lead a better life. By and large, participants’ service satisfies much-needed scarcity while benefiting the large community and the partakers themselves.
Yet a school of thought places faith in making financial donations to philanthropic consortiums. This may seem like a better alternative to those who cannot allocate time for direct support, as a bank transfer would only take seconds. However, in the long run, this would result in undesirable repercussions. It is not axiomatic that leaders of such bodies are impervious to human nature’s greed and gluttony. Instances of embezzlement are not rare, exemplified by Vietnamese celebrities’ public raising funds being peculated by the leaders themselves such as the scandal of Hoai Linh and Thuy Tien recently hit the headlines. Ergo, this is unfair for both volunteers and donors involved, rendering their contributions sent elsewhere. Were executives not to be stricken with greed, 100% of all money donated would not reach the people in need per se, due to loss in taxes and payment for human resources.
In conclusion, direct contributions to humanitarian programs unravel the riddle of manpower scantiness while also helping the people involved themselves, whereas donating money comes with unfavorable outcomes. For those who are lacking in time to join volunteer work, sending gifts such as food and clothes would serve the purpose better.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 497, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...y activities are more accessible by the general public, especially those with abundant time re...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, second, so, whereas, while, in addition, in conclusion, such as, by and large
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2334.0 1615.20841683 145% => OK
No of words: 403.0 315.596192385 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.79156327543 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48049772903 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22405564245 2.80592935109 115% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 176.041082164 150% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.655086848635 0.561755894193 117% => OK
syllable_count: 721.8 506.74238477 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.6108571422 49.4020404114 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.666666667 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3888888889 20.7667163134 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.88888888889 7.06120827912 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.110906724638 0.244688304435 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0331216256497 0.084324248473 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0273132050086 0.0667982634062 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0690859794248 0.151304729494 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0110514560636 0.056905535591 19% => 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: 17.0 13.0946893788 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.6 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.45 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 146.0 78.4519038076 186% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => 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.