To maximize their profit of food traders emphasize on sell of items that traveled long distances before reaching their selling counter, however, this is prejudice with locally produced eatables. In my opinion, I agree that retailers ought to prioritize indigenous nourishment while selling, which will help both society and individuals.
One main reason is that it improves overall social health. Nutritional value declines substantially if food products are preserved for longer periods. By consuming them higher percentage population of any society suffers through vitamin deficiency. Which not only causes serious health complications for individuals but also reduce overall life expectancy among these people. In order to overcome this situation one must embrace fresh eatables which are neither preserved nor traveled long distances.
Another advantage of trading indigenous nourishment locally is that it helps native dwellers with higher employment opportunities. It is obvious that if demand is surging then supply should also be in the same proportion. While this is happening it helps both individual and society by generating more jobs. As a result, a stable outlook can be witnessed from such locality. When India, for instance, was struggling for independence a movement of banning foreign goods stranded - this undoubtedly consolidated against rulers by giving locals job.
Finally, if supermarkets, traders, and retailers boost sells of home-grown food items then capital purchase cost apparently gets reduced for such business people. This is because overhead costs such as transportation, refrigeration and handling are not attracted in its production. Consequently, keeping selling price unchanged.
In conclusion, bias with ethnic food products hurts social elements adversely. To avoid this first preference for local food products must be awarded.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, look, so, then, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 41.998997996 64% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1608.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 274.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.86861313869 5.12529762239 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97560327934 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.693430656934 0.561755894193 123% => OK
syllable_count: 489.6 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.70375717 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.5882352941 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1176470588 20.7667163134 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.35294117647 7.06120827912 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.164528541391 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0465526324401 0.084324248473 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0516497850741 0.0667982634062 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0959401180756 0.151304729494 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0504338837827 0.056905535591 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 50.2224549098 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.47 12.4159519038 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.6 8.58950901804 123% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 78.4519038076 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.