Wealthy countries should accept more refugees and provide them with basic assistance, such as food and housing. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is argued that richer nations should take more asylum seekers and give them food and shelter. This essay totally agrees with this statement because developed nations have necessary finances and relationships between two countries and with other would improve in future
Richer countries can afford to accept refugees since they can afford.it would be humane on the part of these wealthy nations to accept the victims of war and disaster they have financial and other resources and support them with essential life amenities. Moreover, those people looking for shelter would eventually die or become casual if they are not addressed on time in a such situation. Timely helped by the wealthier nations would be a boon to them. For example, Canadian government accepted refuges from Syria and saved the lives of around twenty five thousand people
Relation between richer country and whose natives are readily accepted would improve along with improvement of developmental relationships at a global level. Stronger the relationship, higher is the level of trust. As a result, business deals will increase in future. Those to vulnerable countries would be thankful and would have same polices adjustments in return like reduction of taxes on trade, ease of paper work and opportunities to expand market. For example, Japan accepted refugees from Vietnam in 1996 and Vietnamese government in 2000 reduces taxes on Japan import by 5%.
In conclusion, richer nations have necessary financial resources and their relationships would become good in future at a global level by accepting more refugees and providing them with basic life supplies of house and food. It is recommended that all wealthier nations should accept more refugees
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 258, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
... a result, business deals will increase in future. Those to vulnerable countries would be...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 176, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...by accepting more refugees and providing them with basic life supplies of house a...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, moreover, so, for example, in conclusion, 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: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1470.0 1615.20841683 91% => OK
No of words: 274.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.36496350365 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66790068593 2.80592935109 95% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.57299270073 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 456.3 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
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: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 111.48687059 49.4020404114 226% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 133.636363636 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9090909091 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.72727272727 7.06120827912 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => 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: 0.235251375558 0.244688304435 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.086517602249 0.084324248473 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0750853764363 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15940842445 0.151304729494 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0679036197897 0.056905535591 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 78.4519038076 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 9.78957915832 189% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.