Some people say that economic growth is the only way to end world poverty and hunger. Others say that economic growth is damaging the environment and should stop. Discuss bọth views and give your own opinion.
Opinions differ as to whether the development of the international economy could solve the problem of poverty around the world or it should be stopped for causing severe environmental damage. In my view, I side with the first perspective.
To begin with, there are reasons why people say that economic growth is the key to improving the current state of poverty. The first reason is that the growth of the international economy would help generate more revenues which could then be used to support the poor and the homeless. Take Korea for example, since the non-restriction of global trade from the government in 2010 resulting in a substantial national income, the country has continuously contributed 10 percent of its enormous money resource to assist the in-need citizens each year. As of now, Korea’s hunger and poverty issue is no longer a matter to the government. Another reason is that such a development of the economy would create more jobs for the people. As more and more jobs are made available, the poor population would be able to start making a living themselves and thus, end the problem of poverty.
Unfortunately, every type of development would cost something in return. In this case, it is the environment to be harmed during the process of growing the economy. Due to the expansion of industrialization, more lands would be required for companies to build their factories leading to massive deforestation. In the long run, it could be detrimental to the air as a large area covered by trees and plants, which are the main air-filtering system, gets destroyed. Hence, slowing the pace of economic growth would be a balanced solution to preserve the air environment while retaining the task of controlling poverty and hunger.
In conclusion, while economic growth might indeed harm the environment and should be proceeded slowly and precautiously, I believe it is definitely an effective method to eliminate the problem of world poverty and hunger.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 17, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
Opinions differ as to whether the development of the international ec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, if, so, then, thus, while, as to, for example, in conclusion, in my view, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1662.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 325.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11384615385 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24591054749 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02368715704 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 522.9 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.379020912 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.714285714 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2142857143 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.57142857143 7.06120827912 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.192226520594 0.244688304435 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0639272784454 0.084324248473 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0756455502871 0.0667982634062 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127507761141 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0458237288414 0.056905535591 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.