Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
The more money people have, the more they should contribute to charity.
"Human beings are members of a whole, in the creation of one essence and soul." This motto is a perfect expression about helping people with each other in difficulties. Although some people do not believe in charity, I would rather think that you have to contribute some part of it as alms if you have the extra money. In the following paragraphs, the most outstanding reasons for my point of view will be explained.
First of all, God's gifts do not distribute equally all around the world. Some parts of the world are rich in God's gifts; however, other parts look barrier. What is the guilt of people who were born in barrier places and lived in poorness? In contrast, why some people should use a wide variety of God's gifts just because they were born in the richest places. These kinds of questions make me believe that people should help each other, especially to people how have belonged to the weaker part of society. By this kind of action may be a little part of these injustices and inequalities is compensated. In addition, charity actions help people find out the talented persons who live in poor conditions and make some opportunities to flourish and improve their lives and futures. However, I believe that life obeys circular rules. When you do something good, the life cycle pays your well-heart action in different ways, too. It is looking like a circular loop that if someone does his own duty as well as possible, everything is going to be wonderful for him, and not only the poor person profit in this deal but also the God's give more gifts for the kind person. For example, my uncle is a very rich person how it is really like to help people and solve their problems. As he is doing his best for others, God wants the best for him and gets richer.
Another feature of the contribution of money in charities is that the crime and danger in society are reduced and governments can control it better. Many crimes have been happened because of poor conditions of families, and individuals cannot afford their family members' first desires. As a result of charity contribution, the economic problems of individuals are reduced. So these conditions motivate people to prevent them from doing bad habits and crimes like robbery and larceny. If rich people participate in charity action, they will save their assets and budgets. For example, it has been proven by scientists and psychologists that the society how to have a good organization for charity behavior, the number of crimes and dangerous actions is obviously reduced and the richest person assets are safe. This kind of society grows better in an economical path. However, the next generation of this society is getting to act healthier behavior than before. They also found out that after a while in this society, the desires of bad habits and manners are surprisingly reduced and the individuals are motivated to be a beneficial person. That’s why it is another loop of life cycles.
To bringing everything into a conclusion, spending money on charity not only prevents the crimes and makes the personal assets of riches be safe but also, in some conditions it helps to increase their profits and God's gifts. So from my point of view, it is logical decisions to contribute the more money to charity as becoming richer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 142, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'betters', 'wells'?
Suggestion: betters; wells
... reduced and governments can control it better. Many crimes have been happened because...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, look, may, really, so, well, while, for example, in addition, in contrast, kind of, as a result, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 15.1003584229 192% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 13.8261648746 174% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 43.0788530466 114% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 52.1666666667 142% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2744.0 1977.66487455 139% => OK
No of words: 571.0 407.700716846 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.80560420315 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.88831323574 4.48103885553 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58193385834 2.67179642975 97% => OK
Unique words: 280.0 212.727598566 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.490367775832 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 864.0 618.680645161 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.5509449375 48.9658058833 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.62962963 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1481481481 20.6045352989 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.62962962963 5.45110844103 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 11.8709677419 143% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => 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: 0.231441757211 0.236089414692 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0569596009258 0.076458572812 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.057686825158 0.0737576698707 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15082549682 0.150856017488 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302445861525 0.0645574589148 47% => 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: 11.8 11.7677419355 100% => 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: 10.62 10.9000537634 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.01818996416 101% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 86.8835125448 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.