Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Government, instead of individuals, should cover Internet fees.
In the modern era, Internet plays a crucial role in societies. Nowadays, most of the people and companies are dependent on internet so that they can survive the current economic situation. Some people, possess the conviction that governments should pay for internet feed instead of individuals. I believe that it is not a prudent course of action. To substantiate my point of view, the following paragraphs represent a cursory glance at the most outstanding reasons.
First and foremost, the majority of people who use internet are young people and children. It is axiomatic that most of the time, these people use internet for unnecessary purposes, so it is not fair to provide them with the free internet access. In other words, there are other groups of people who really are in desperate need of Internet for their business and education, while other group just use it for entertainment. Therefore, it is possible that the younger group of people use internet invariably, and other groups lose their chance of having a good access to the internet. My own experience is a case in point. In our country, Internet is free for all people. Approximately five years ago, I found an Information technology company, but in view of the fact that Internet was free for all, they always used that in an improper way, so we always had so many problems to connect to the Internet. Finally, I failed to expand my business because of this situation. Had the Internet not been free for all, we would have been able to be successful probably.
The second noteworthy reason to be mentioned is that governments earn money from imposing tax on people, and different people use internet differently. It goes without saying that the more internet they use, the more tax they should pay. Nevertheless, if government pay for internet, it will impose the same amount of tax on people, no matter how much they use internet, and it is not fair. To put it simply, people who use more internet should pay more. In the research conducted in my country in 2020, people were asked to express their opinion about accessing to Internet for free. The results revealed that virtually ninety percent of people believed that it is not a good idea due to the fact that some people don’t use internet at all but should pay taxes. They also alleged that there are several numbers of people who use internet permanently, but they pay the same amount of taxes.
In short, all the aforementioned reasons lead us to the conclusion that it is not a sensible course of action that government provide internet for free in view of the fact that some group of people such as youngsters use internet permanently and for unimportant aims, so t will affect others’ access quality and will take a drastic toll on them. Moreover, government earn money from imposing tax on people, and since people pay the same taxes, it is not justly because they use internet at different rate. However, that was a story in a nutshell; actually, there are some other examples and reasons which are not mentioned above. Finally, it is suggested that more surveys be conducted to find out the pros and cons of this plan.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 553, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'good access'.
Suggestion: good access
...ther groups lose their chance of having a good access to the internet. My own experience is a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 822, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an improper way" with adverb for "improper"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...was free for all, they always used that in an improper way, so we always had so many problems to c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, really, second, so, therefore, while, in short, such as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 15.1003584229 179% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 11.0286738351 209% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 58.0 43.0788530466 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 52.1666666667 123% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2616.0 1977.66487455 132% => OK
No of words: 546.0 407.700716846 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.79120879121 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.48103885553 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64185108498 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.446886446886 0.524837075471 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 825.3 618.680645161 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 9.59856630824 156% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.2261787935 48.9658058833 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.64 100.406767564 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.84 20.6045352989 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.45110844103 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.139793027549 0.236089414692 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0504337355441 0.076458572812 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0399408762778 0.0737576698707 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104548120856 0.150856017488 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0288255388008 0.0645574589148 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 11.7677419355 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 58.1214874552 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 10.9000537634 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.69 8.01818996416 96% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 86.8835125448 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.002688172 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.