In some countries, an increasing number of people are suffering from health problems as a result of eating too much fast food. It is, therefore, necessary for governments to impose a higher tax on this kind of food.
Do you agree or disagree?
It is argued that governments should levy a tariff on junk food because the number of health risks associated with consuming this kind of food is on the rise. This essay agrees that a higher rate of tax should be paid by fast-food companies. Firstly, alcohol and tobacco companies already pay higher taxes and secondly, higher taxes could raise prices and lower consumption.
Higher excise on liqueur and cigarettes has proven to be successful at curbing the harm caused by these substances. This revenue has been used to treat health problems associated with these products and has proven useful in advertising campaigns warning people about the dangers of alcohol and tobacco abuse. Tax from fast food could be used in the same way. The United Kingdom is a prime example, where money from smokers is used to treat lung cancer and heart disease.
Increasing taxes would raise prices and lower consumption. Fast food companies would pass on these taxes to consumers in the form of higher prices and this would lead to people not being able to afford junk food because it is too expensive. Junk food would soon become a luxury item and it would only be consumed occasionally, which would be less harmful to the general public’s health. For instance, the cost of organic food has proven prohibitively expensive for most people and that is why only a small percentage of the population buy it regularly.
In conclusion, junk food should be taxed at a higher rate because of the good precedent set by alcohol and tobacco and the fact that the increased cost should reduce the amount of fast-food people buy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 203, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to junk'
Suggestion: to junk
...lead to people not being able to afford junk food because it is too expensive. Junk ...
^^^^
Line 6, column 363, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...lly, which would be less harmful to the general public’s health. For instance, the cost of org...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, for instance, in conclusion, kind of, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1343.0 1615.20841683 83% => OK
No of words: 274.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90145985401 5.12529762239 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50900928735 2.80592935109 89% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 176.041082164 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.507299270073 0.561755894193 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 409.5 506.74238477 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5994827362 49.4020404114 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.916666667 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8333333333 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.91666666667 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => 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: 0.29888135009 0.244688304435 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122247884726 0.084324248473 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0719392670675 0.0667982634062 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.193466906889 0.151304729494 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0569930781737 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.0946893788 100% => 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: 11.44 12.4159519038 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.58950901804 97% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 78.4519038076 80% => More difficult words wanted.
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: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.