Should wealthy nations be required to share their wealth among poorer nations by providing such things as food and education. Or is it the responsibility of the governments of the poorer nations to look after their citizens themselves?!
Rich countries should provide assistance to poorer nations by supplying things like food and education. Or governments should be responsible about its habitants.
Actually both sides have intergral role in developing poorer conutries. So wealthy nations should cooperate with poorer countries in putting some solutions and rescources to prevent things which it may lead to poverty. For example, richer countries instead of providing them basic needs all the time, which it will be consumed and run out later due to over consumption by human themselves, they can think about alternative resources which it may help them to improve their countries. For example, building companies in the country would be an advantage to support poorer country to eliminate from austerity which they encounter it constantly. In addition, wealthy countries may invest their money to bulid schools and universities, so people can work in it and get monthly pay salary, which it may survive them from the pain of poverty. As a result, both parties can obtain mutual benifits.
However, developved nations have high technology equipment and devices, which it can be shipped to undeveloped countries, so that they can rely on buidling their conuntry and working in improving it. For example, for education, they can supply them different kind of computers. Also, labs's materials can be provided for them. In addition, they may send construction's equipment, so that they can build companies and schools for education purpose. As a consequence, teachers will be employed and other professional may find a job to work in a company which it might suit their qualifications to bring money.
In other way, undeveloped nations will be more productive, as they will have mutiple opportunities such as; exporting local brands to developed countries and getting money as an alternative.
In brief, wealthy nations should give a hand to poorer conutries in cooperation with the government to eradicate poverty. In addition, strategies and plans can be set precisely to avoid poverty in a country.
- These days many of us prefer to throw damaged things away, whereas in the past people used to repair damaged items and keep them for a long time. Explain why you think this change has happened. What are the effects of this change in attitude? 78
- Company has advertised a vacancy job at major sport event and this job is unpaid job. And the job will start next month. Why would like to work in this job? Ask the the company something that you need to clear up. 56
- There is no debate that being in a real English language environment will help anyone to master the language in the fastest and most effective way and many international students prefer to go to English-speaking countries to study and learn the internatio 56
- Internet has tremendously negative impact on human being. To what extent you agree? 73
- Some people think that man made Zoos should not exist in the 21st century Do you agree or disagree 68
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 123, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...th the government to eradicate poverty. In addition, strategies and plans can be s...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, however, if, may, so, for example, in addition, in brief, kind of, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 7.85571142285 318% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1749.0 1615.20841683 108% => OK
No of words: 327.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34862385321 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92715667832 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556574923547 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 523.8 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.9660510038 49.4020404114 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.3125 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4375 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4375 7.06120827912 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249750894583 0.244688304435 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0970889209927 0.084324248473 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0902395084648 0.0667982634062 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183066023657 0.151304729494 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102433737713 0.056905535591 180% => OK
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.