Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Governments should spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
With the increment of people's life standard, people are having more and more leisure time to spend on artworks. So they may think governments should spend more money to support arts rather than athletics. I disagree with this opinion. Here are my reasons.
First of all, supporting athletics can do good to raise the international status between countries. There are Olympic Games held every four years, on which people from all over the world is focusing. The more money the government spend in support of athletics such as building more stadiums or buying more facilities for athletes, the more effective the training for athletes will be. For example, China was not doing so well in Olympic Games several decades of years ago, and China also didn't have so much influence on international business and Chinese people were considered weak at that time. But the Chinese government realized the importance of athletics and began to spend more money on athletics such as building stadiums, hiring experienced coaches and equipping more facilities for the players. In the circumstance that country were attaching more importance on athletics, more and more people made a decision to become an athletes because of the high quality of training with all kinds of equipment and experienced coaches. Not so many years cost, China got the 3rd place of the Olympic Games. And in 2008, the Olympic Games was held in Beijing, which attracted many tourists and greatly raise the international status of China. So spending money on athletics can be rewarded by the increment of international status of the country.
In addition, more money spent on athletics can bring government more tax charged from people to build more public facilities. If the government spend more money on athletics matches such as improving the broadcasting technologies of the match and building or beautifying the stadium of the match, people will be more willing to spend money to watch the matches due to the great experience. For example, my uncle was not so obsessed in football games ten years ago because of the poor watching experience of the football match. But as the government improving the broadcasting technology, the audience can watch a football game from many direction on TV, which attracted my uncle. After that, my uncle would watch the football games every week and bought a lot of products about his favorite football team. In fact, not just my uncle was affected by the increment of the watching experience of football games, many people began to spend money on supporting their favorite team, which cause a big increment of economic. So the money spent on supporting athletics is going to transfer into the increment of economic.
Taking what has been discussed above into account, government spending more money on athletics rather than arts can not only bring the increment of the countries' international status but also the increment of the economic of the country.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 489, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...al decades of years ago, and China also didnt have so much influence on international...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 931, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'an athlete' or simply 'athletes'?
Suggestion: an athlete; athletes
...d more people made a decision to become an athletes because of the high quality of training...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, so, well, for example, in addition, in fact, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 43.0788530466 30% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 52.1666666667 136% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 8.0752688172 297% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2479.0 1977.66487455 125% => OK
No of words: 487.0 407.700716846 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09034907598 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69766713281 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71135415932 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 212.727598566 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.439425051335 0.524837075471 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 760.5 618.680645161 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.9260562901 48.9658058833 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.047619048 100.406767564 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1904761905 20.6045352989 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42857142857 5.45110844103 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.276949436575 0.236089414692 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0965701716123 0.076458572812 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0789892001149 0.0737576698707 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194048652981 0.150856017488 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0547529991468 0.0645574589148 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 11.7677419355 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 10.9000537634 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.47 8.01818996416 93% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 86.8835125448 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.002688172 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.