Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The increase in automation will lead to people losing their jobs.
Jobs are important part of our lives. With jobs, one have a means to provide for necessary and basic needs. Some people fear that increase in automation in many organizations will lead to lost jobs. Some disagrees with this position. As for me, I do mostly agree that automation would lead to drastic reduction in the need of human power for the following reasons.
First of all, traditional roles requiring human power would be replaced by automation. If roles are being replaced, then the persons employed to undertake those tasks previously would be considered useless. For instance, when 3 dispensing machines were introduced at my mother’s work place at El-Marine Pharmacy, Canada, a few months ago, not less than 5 Pharmacists were laid off. The automation is partly due to the social media distancing COVID-19 policy and the need to respond to emergencies as fast as possible. Since human power truly are sometimes deficient in terms of speed and accuracy. The organization, thus, thought it best to introduce those dispensing machines to help with filling prescriptions. There, I could see that such technological innovation brought about some persons losing their means of livelihood.
In addition, less people are needed to operate a technological innovation. With that thought, I am certain employers would not find any reason to retain those whose jobs have been replaced. I can also remember too what happened in my Father’s farm at Kentucky. The farm is a fairly big one, which requires not less than 40 manual labourers for ploughing. When he purchased a mechanical plough, he only needed 4 persons for a proper work done. Those not chosen basically lost their livelihood and were made to face the seemingly cruel labour marker again. Since just a little number of persons are needed to operate an automatic machine, many were forced to be laid of.
Despite the high tendency of lost jobs as a result of increased automation in our society today, I must say that, there are some jobs that are totally irreplaceable. For instance, doctors and nurses in healthcare centres are difficult to be replaced.
In conclusion, even though increased automation might not always lead to job loss, I mostly agree that it poses such danger. Apart from seeing automation replacing traditional roles, less and less person are needed to operate any technological innovation. Though we cannot turn our backs to automation, a developing society should always seek to provide more means of job for its citizens.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 95, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ave a means to provide for necessary and basic needs. Some people fear that incre...
^^
Line 3, column 321, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ork place at El-Marine Pharmacy, Canada, a few months ago, not less than 5 Pharma...
^^
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ir means of livelihood. In addition, less people are needed to operate a technolo...
^^^^
Line 7, column 99, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eased automation in our society today, I must say that, there are some jobs that ...
^^
Line 7, column 203, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ble. For instance, doctors and nurses in healthcare centres are difficult to be r...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, so, then, thus, apart from, as for, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 52.1666666667 100% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.0752688172 211% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2112.0 1977.66487455 107% => OK
No of words: 413.0 407.700716846 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11380145278 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82112563199 2.67179642975 106% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 212.727598566 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578692493947 0.524837075471 110% => OK
syllable_count: 661.5 618.680645161 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.51792114695 227% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.0120229968 48.9658058833 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0 100.406767564 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2083333333 20.6045352989 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.45110844103 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.22160707491 0.236089414692 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0572689184047 0.076458572812 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0695645892644 0.0737576698707 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132409911562 0.150856017488 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0967665348092 0.0645574589148 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 11.7677419355 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 58.1214874552 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.06 10.9000537634 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 86.8835125448 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.002688172 60% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.