It is often believed by some that the technological advancements have increased the gap between poor and rich, whereas others think that advanced technology has decreased this gap.In my opinion, technological advances are resulting in decrease in gap between rich and poor because now various opportunities are available to poor at affordable costs or even free which would not have been possible in the past.
On the one hand, some believe that the recent technology comes at a higher price which poor cannot afford, so the gap between poor and rich is increasing. This is to say that in order to benefit from modern technologies, people could spend lot of money to avail those services, resulting in no access to poor for such facilities. For instance, companies such as Google, Facebook etc charge heavy fees for marketing the products of various companies, which might make it difficult for small shops owned by poor to market their businesses.However, I do not agree with this as there are small online marketing companies who cater to the promotion of products offered by shops, and promote their products for free or for a minimal charge, resulting in increase in their business opportunities.
One the other hand, some people claim that advanced technologies have offered various opportunities to poor which were inaccessible to them in the recent past.In other words, poor can now benefit from use of technology use at an affordable cost or even for free, and generate more business opportunities, resulting in more and more wealth creation. For instance, a recent study conducted by the Asian School of Entrepreneurship in 2015 reveals that as a result of social media marketing, small shops are now able to market their products well, resulting in increase in their profits by around 40 percent.I agree to this view because as a result in new technology, poor people now have better platforms to generate wealth, which was unlikely in the recent past.
In conclusion, although advanced technology is expensive for some, it is still resulting in reducing the difference between poor and rich, as now not all technologies are expensive and can benefit the poor as well.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 181, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: In
...anced technology has decreased this gap.In my opinion, technological advances are ...
^^
Line 3, column 538, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...wned by poor to market their businesses.However, I do not agree with this as there are ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 132, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tunities to poor which were inaccessible to them in the recent past.In other word...
^^
Line 5, column 161, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: In
...naccessible to them in the recent past.In other words, poor can now benefit from ...
^^
Line 5, column 606, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: I
...e in their profits by around 40 percent.I agree to this view because as a result ...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, still, well, whereas, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, in my opinion, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1831.0 1615.20841683 113% => OK
No of words: 359.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10027855153 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35284910392 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91793599096 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.487465181058 0.561755894193 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 569.7 506.74238477 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 16.0721442886 44% => 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: 51.0 20.2975951904 251% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 116.968860325 49.4020404114 237% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 261.571428571 106.682146367 245% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 51.2857142857 20.7667163134 247% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 17.0 7.06120827912 241% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.243071855764 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13862945113 0.084324248473 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0980527164692 0.0667982634062 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180081966822 0.151304729494 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0769707701645 0.056905535591 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 28.2 13.0946893788 215% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: 19.71 50.2224549098 39% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 23.2 11.3001002004 205% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 13.19 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 9.78957915832 199% => OK
gunning_fog: 22.4 10.1190380762 221% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.