Some people think that the government wasting money on the arts and that this money could be better spent elsewhere. To what extent do you agree with this view?

In contemporary society, people inclined to think that the state subsidies for supporting art projects and cultural customs are significantly unnecessary, in opposition, argued that the idea of the government fund for them is more likely to be beneficial and lucrative in some ways. These two approaches have distinct advantages and the choice is a matter of my personal predilection.
On the one hand, I am firmly convinced that art and culture not only bring precious inherent values but also contribute to reinforcing pecuniary progression as well as economic growth. Personally,It is conceivable that people have lived in society without the civilising influence of art and folklore and tossed away what is the most delectable in life,to be specific,remove sculptures and artistic pictures from museums where edify descendants how intelligent and creative ancestors might be, expunge time-honoured festivals creeping into people's lifestyles and behaviours along with statues on streets or squares,and others, if they happened, people would leave in a society bereft of personal and national identities as artworks and cultural customs serve as to define how we are and teach us how the roots of behaviours and emotions are-to philanthropy and jealousy, graciousness and maliciousness, happiness and pathos. Besides, these artworks and culture also attractive to foreign tourists via the practical and stunning beauty of them to visitors'vision and provide considerable financial investments to a country’s development. Consequently, municipal and national governments should spend money on preserving and revitalizing art and culture.
On the other hand, I can apprehend why arguments against national funding for art and culture. This reasoning is advocated as societal and environmental afflictions facing their own countries, for instance, the increasing unemployment, insufficient housing or sustenance to nourish people’s life and health,and plastic pollutions wreaking havoc on natural habitats, as well as, the investments of the government on education, healthy sanitation and the infrastructure that means that state budgets would be expended on in abundance. From my personal perspective, these concerns are important for a country to meet the welfare and health.
In conclusion, it may seem to me that indigenous residents should concentrate on protecting and contributing their personal budgets to art and culture along with national fund.

Votes
Average: 8.9 (1 vote)

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 195, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , It
...n as well as economic growth. Personally,It is conceivable that people have lived i...
^^^
Line 2, column 352, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , to
...away what is the most delectable in life,to be specific,remove sculptures and artis...
^^^
Line 2, column 367, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , remove
...e most delectable in life,to be specific,remove sculptures and artistic pictures from m...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 614, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , and
...along with statues on streets or squares,and others, if they happened, people would ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 311, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , and
...to nourish people's life and health,and plastic pollutions wreaking havoc on na...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, if, may, so, well, as to, for instance, in conclusion, as well as, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 34.0 10.4138276553 326% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2106.0 1615.20841683 130% => OK
No of words: 364.0 315.596192385 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.78571428571 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36792674256 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.33713756672 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 176.041082164 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612637362637 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 506.74238477 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 16.0721442886 62% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 36.0 20.2975951904 177% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 193.36845658 49.4020404114 391% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 210.6 106.682146367 197% => OK
Words per sentence: 36.4 20.7667163134 175% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.8 7.06120827912 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More 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: 0.157693103345 0.244688304435 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0525916773871 0.084324248473 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0483759307367 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0847935930055 0.151304729494 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0256564447965 0.056905535591 45% => 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: 24.0 13.0946893788 183% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 18.02 50.2224549098 36% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 19.7 11.3001002004 174% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.89 12.4159519038 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.1 8.58950901804 129% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 78.4519038076 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.78957915832 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.4 10.1190380762 162% => 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.