Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Nowadays people are more willing to help people they don't know (for example, by giving clothing and food to people who need them) than they were in the past.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer Be sure to use your own words. Do not use memorized examples
A controversial issue relating to whether nowadays people help other people more than in the past, has brought to the attention of relevant people. Many people think that in the past the spirit to help people in need was higher than it is today. On the contrary, in my opinion, individuals have more empathy for poor people today than they had in the past.
First of all, increased incomes and well-beings have made possible for people empathizing more with poor conditions of people. To be more specific, if people received a reasonable amount of salary, they would tend to help others in need. For example, during my academic years, my family had a tight budget. They tried to help me financially as much as they could, but still it was not enough for covering my expenses. Of course, during those years my family never thought about helping other people. After I graduated, I found a good job with a high wage, which I used it helping not only my family, but also some of the poor families in my neighborhood. I helped them by providing free meals for a couple of months. On the other hand, if I had have paid less, I would not have helped these people. Overall, this tells us that nowadays people with high incomes will think more of helping people in need.
Furthermore, with the development of technology, people are becoming more motivated to do good in this world. In fact, individuals are encouraged by advertisements that they see everywhere to help poor people by denoting goods to them. For instance, my brother has a high paid job, and he easily could afford helping people that need help. Actually, he never thought about doing such a thing. One day he saw an add on TV that encouraged people to give to poor. After he thought through this possibility, he just donated two of his salaries to the community church, which has designed a program, so that they could help the poor people not only in our area, but also in the entire city. According to this example, technology really plays an important role on encouraging people who never thought to donate before, even if they can afford such a thing.
In conclusion, people tend to donate more today than they did in the past. This is because their incomes are drastically increased in recent years. And because, the new technology has developed forms of adds that have a positive impact on people's decision- making of helping people in need.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 610, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...it helping not only my family, but also some of the poor families in my neighborhood. I hel...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 746, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
... of months. On the other hand, if I had have paid less, I would not have helped thes...
^^^^
Line 5, column 310, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to help'.
Suggestion: to help
...gh paid job, and he easily could afford helping people that need help. Actually, he nev...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 409, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...bout doing such a thing. One day he saw an add on TV that encouraged people to give to...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, furthermore, if, really, so, still, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, of course, first of all, in my opinion, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 51.0 43.0788530466 118% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 52.1666666667 128% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.0752688172 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1991.0 1977.66487455 101% => OK
No of words: 424.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.69575471698 4.8611393121 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53775939005 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53471689511 2.67179642975 95% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 212.727598566 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.48820754717 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 617.4 618.680645161 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.86738351254 268% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 13.0 4.94265232975 263% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.7193928112 48.9658058833 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.5 100.406767564 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2727272727 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.86363636364 5.45110844103 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.383518759803 0.236089414692 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.134093848446 0.076458572812 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0867257059483 0.0737576698707 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.272106224222 0.150856017488 180% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0476489486752 0.0645574589148 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 11.7677419355 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.98 10.9000537634 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.33 8.01818996416 91% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 86.8835125448 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => 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: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.