Some people say that economic growth is the only way to end hunger and poverty, while others say that economic growth is damaging the environment so it should be stopped. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
In the middle of globalization process, the intense debate over economic growth has been dominated by two themes. One is that the growth in economy could be seen as the only way to lead mankind to a new world of no hunger and poverty. Second is that we should put the economic growth under control due to the deadly threats to our environment that come along with it. In the sphere of this essay, I will discuss both pros and cons of these views mentioned above.
On the one hand, although economic growth has significantly improved our life’s quality, it is rapidly motivating the gap among social classes. A vast majority of our population are manual workers whose salary only afford basic needs, or even worse, only one dollar per day depending on their place of living. Therefore, they virtually have no ability to afford common devices as well as to feel difficult to approach high-technology devices such as transporting vehicles or telecommunication applications. Furthermore, despite the fact that almost policies were expected to pave the way for solving poverty, the fact is that the lower-income earners is still suffocated under the cloak of taxes. In the less-developed countries, for example, passing the law of tax which benefit the illusions of national economic growth instead of the poor did result in widening the gap between social classes. As a result, the expectation of a bright future brought by economic growth is crashing down in many certain regions for the reality that the rich become richer and the poor become poorer.
On another hand, our environment could never restore as it was, even if humans cease all the economic activity, since economic growth is only one of numerous factors to result in environmental damage. Despite the solutions given for years such as decreasing leftovers, recycling plastic rubbish and using eco-friendly material, the final results seems to be insignificant. Furthermore, a series of serious issues emerging in recent years like overpopulation, erroneous development strategy, and poverty did account for the bulk of factors to burden a heavy pressure on the our planet in terms of environment degradation. One of the most egregious examples is the deeds blinded by the power of money that are still occurring everyday in the less-developed countries. In these countries, the corrupted governments did legalize illegal logging as well as illegal poaching that affect seriously the ecosystem's balance. A day may come when human raise the awareness in the environment problems, yet neither the magnificent animals that once roam across the savannah of Africa nor the virgin forests that once were our green lungs would survive till that day.
In conclusion, economic growth plays an important role in global development. However, tied with this development is the unpredictable consequences over the environment. In my opinion, a method that could harmonize the economical benefits and environmental preservation is the best way humans should put priority on.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 570, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'our'?
Suggestion: the; our
...f factors to burden a heavy pressure on the our planet in terms of environment degradat...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 680, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...regious examples is the deeds blinded by the power of money that are still occurr...
^^
Line 6, column 726, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
...power of money that are still occurring everyday in the less-developed countries. In the...
^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 220, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...nion, a method that could harmonize the economical benefits and environmental preservation...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, still, therefore, well, as to, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 41.998997996 162% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2551.0 1615.20841683 158% => OK
No of words: 487.0 315.596192385 154% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23819301848 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69766713281 4.20363070211 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97995925937 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 279.0 176.041082164 158% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572895277207 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 810.9 506.74238477 160% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 9.0 2.52805611222 356% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.4719258176 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.263157895 106.682146367 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6315789474 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.84210526316 7.06120827912 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.237402678068 0.244688304435 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0704150145704 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0601344615936 0.0667982634062 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159877482257 0.151304729494 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.075426091787 0.056905535591 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 78.4519038076 187% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.