More and more qualified people are moving from poor to rich countries to fill vacancies in specialist areas like engineering, computing and medicine.
Some people believe that by encouraging the movement of such people, rich countries are stealing from poor countries. Others feel that this is only part of the natural movement of workers around the world.
Do you agree or disagree?
Nowadays, travelling for work on sponsorship to foreign country has become a common phenomenon. A host of engineers, computer scientist and medical professional move out of their country at a very early stage. My view is that irrespective of the numerous arguments that exist on the either side, this type of movement is crucial for the growth of an intellectually high personal and its often natural. Through the course of this essay, I would like to put forth my points and calculations by considering both the sides of the argument.
There are a number of reasons in support of my viewpoint. One of them is that, highly skilled workers are moving very quickly for employment purposes to affluent countries. This is because the affluent countries have scarcity of people in the field of research, technology and medicine. It is important to note that these well-to-do nations have enormous research projects due to which these people get a good chance to learn more. If they are not invited to work in these type of highly equipped and skilled projects then they will always fall back of these huge practical knowledge. Many Indians, for instance, turn towards USA to work on big technology work that might not be possible in their home place since their own country is impoverished.
Furthermore, the rich countries are providing a good platform to these people to leverage their knowledge. Since, these individual get a good scope to showcase their talent; hence, they can benefit the world with their work which eventually will create a good reputation for their own developing country. To illustrate it, when engineers give a great performance in their work place, they make their country proud in the eyes of others. As a consequence of which they help our country generate more employment opportunities.
However, some people feel that this can be of a great loss to poor countries. Firstly, most of the smart people will move of the country, so there can be deficit of skilled people for the development of the country. This can hamper the growth of the less-affluent countries. Thus, it can be considered a major loss to the country. Lets take an example, If the engineer who is skilled at handling railway stations issue is out of the country then it can be create a big drawback for a country like India to cope up with the everyday railway requirements.
I see that there is equally potential evidence to support the arguments I have provided and hence I am of the opinion that intelligent people are moving just to suffice their intellectual needs as a natural movement, and the rich countries are not stealing them. I am inclined to believe that with the progress in the time more people will move out to become part of bigger projects in the rich countries.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 438, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ir country proud in the eyes of others. As a consequence of which they help our co...
^^
Line 7, column 332, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
...considered a major loss to the country. Lets take an example, If the engineer who is...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, so, then, thus, well, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 51.0 24.0651302605 212% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 41.998997996 164% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2312.0 1615.20841683 143% => OK
No of words: 474.0 315.596192385 150% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.8776371308 5.12529762239 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66599839874 4.20363070211 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76370663832 2.80592935109 98% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 176.041082164 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491561181435 0.561755894193 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 711.9 506.74238477 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 5.43587174349 221% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2218221999 49.4020404114 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.095238095 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5714285714 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.95238095238 7.06120827912 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.215227955988 0.244688304435 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0690020585143 0.084324248473 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0622494028582 0.0667982634062 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130038220155 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0615407159173 0.056905535591 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.0946893788 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 50.2224549098 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.4159519038 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.58950901804 93% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.