Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It's a waste of money for the Government to fund space travel or space exploration. Give specific examples and details to support your answer.
There are many countries to study space, and the field is very costed to research. Therefore, the governments currently started investing in it. Should they capitalize on it? Some people think that the administrative places should fund space research. However, it is not helpful for the governments to fund space travel or space exploration because they don’t have enough money to support space exploration financially, and researchers are already supported by the researchers’ companies.
First of all, governments do have insufficient money to invest on the space fields. What this means is that the revenue of governments generally comes from the people’s taxes, so they should prioritize where to spend the money wisely. There are important issues such as health and education that need more government funding. The most important factor to operate the governments is people. Then, in the health sector, when people get illness, which is a serious problem for society such as an epidemic, it will be fatal for the management of them. For example, many historians argue that one of the most impacted factor to cause a lot of past countries fall. Also, in the case of education, this is a source of technological advancement. Therefore, if people are not instructed, especially higher-schooling such as university or college, the administration would not exploit future technology. However, people have to pay a lot of money for attending, which means that it is necessary for the organizations to back them financially. This clearly shows that the government should not support space prober due to the lack of money.
Second, governments are not responsible for supporting space fields. This is because other places such as universities and private companies recognize that one of the most impacted future industry is the space industry. To be specific, scientific research is already well supported by organizations. Thus, the governments don’t need to be an additional supporter especially if it has no practical use. Let me bring up my personal story as an example. I am currently working as an engineer at a large corporation in Korea. My job is to come up with innovative ideas and create equipment for space exploration. Most of my ideas and sample engines for going to space more efficiently will never be used, but I continue to research because I’m getting paid for it by the company which is a space company. Once they decide on equipment and start using the items when they fire their rocket to space. Hence, there is absolutely no need for extra funding from the government for my research.
In conclusion, what governments support space travel or exploration is a waste of money. they have to focus on other important things such as health and education. This is because they are the most crucial factors in countries. Scientists already have gotten funding from companies because companies and universities foresee the future industry such as space travel.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It s a waste of money for the Government to fund space travel or space exploration Give specific examples and details to support your answer 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It s a waste of money for the Government to fund space travel or space exploration Give specific examples and details to support your answer 81
- Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship between people 70
- Agnostides 75
- eco certified wood 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 89, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: They
...vel or exploration is a waste of money. they have to focus on other important things...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, second, so, then, therefore, thus, well, for example, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 15.1003584229 166% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 43.0788530466 86% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.0752688172 198% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2505.0 1977.66487455 127% => OK
No of words: 484.0 407.700716846 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17561983471 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69041575982 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98229971167 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47520661157 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 785.7 618.680645161 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.6003584229 141% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.4763138881 48.9658058833 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.3793103448 100.406767564 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6896551724 20.6045352989 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.41379310345 5.45110844103 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.88709677419 225% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.300264334471 0.236089414692 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0883116650669 0.076458572812 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0975398257416 0.0737576698707 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.212095920238 0.150856017488 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0437997833748 0.0645574589148 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 11.7677419355 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 58.1214874552 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.05 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 86.8835125448 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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.