It is hard to deny that education has been made universal, raising the masses' cultural and scientific level, which leads impressionable people to conclude that people are easier to find a secure job than in the past. However, such a statement suffers from both logical and factual fallacies, and it should be examined meticulously. As far as technology development, economic globalization, and population growth are concerned, I firmly hold the view that it is tough for people even to predict the near future, making it harder to identify whether the job is secure or not.
First and foremost, many jobs that used to be secure have been no longer needed with technology development, as computers or other machines have displaced many employees. Meanwhile, modern industrial technology is developing at an incredible speed, a trend that machines take manual, intelligent control instead of manual control appears in all kinds of productions. Not to mention that many factories would like to use more automation technology once the cost of it is acceptable because of its outstanding performance in improving the level of productivity and reducing the number of workers required. As a result, people will be uncertain about the next eliminating job under the rapid development of technology.
Furthermore, the fact that in the environment of economic globalization, rapid changes happen in professions and trades and various fields at present days indicates that a secure job is not easy to find. Take the case of a factory in southern China, which mainly obtained orders from foreign customers as their contract manufacturers. This factory, having a total of 7000 workers, had been running smoothly for ten years. Many of the workers had thought their jobs are stable until the financial crisis came. The global financial crisis brought deadly damage to this factory, resulting in new orders down by about 90 percent, so the factory had to lay off more than half its workers. Had it not been for economic globalization's influence, market and employment would not have such a dramatic shift in a relevantly short period.
Nevertheless, a voice arises that the popularization of education urges to improve laborers' quality, helping them get a secure job. Ironically, people would find that even their average educational attainment is higher than in the past, it is more difficult for them to find a satisfying job. The global population is growing so fast that it considerably exceeds the speed of job growth. Having a flood of the same educational degree everywhere, no doubt that today's job market is increasingly competitive for them. Therefore, getting a secure job can be challenging for modern people due to population growth.
In a nutshell, I maintain that people had fewer struggles to find a secure job compared to today in the past. Admittedly, as my favorite quote from Penelope Fitzgerald goes, it is interesting to note that everyone has a different take on the world, a different opinion, and given the same inputs have completely different outputs, and some people may oppose me. However, I believe they will compromise after being exposed to my article.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 367, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cturers. This factory, having a total of 7000 workers, had been running smoothly ...
^^
Line 7, column 73, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'improving'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'urge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: improving
...t the popularization of education urges to improve laborers quality, helping them get a se...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, while, no doubt, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 52.1666666667 121% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.0752688172 235% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2667.0 1977.66487455 135% => OK
No of words: 515.0 407.700716846 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1786407767 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.763781212 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96869899458 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 279.0 212.727598566 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.541747572816 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 850.5 618.680645161 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.3766573235 48.9658058833 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.0 100.406767564 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5238095238 20.6045352989 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.52380952381 5.45110844103 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => 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: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121530241038 0.236089414692 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0372270338813 0.076458572812 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0318644548088 0.0737576698707 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0699254681716 0.150856017488 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0308594364743 0.0645574589148 48% => 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: 15.2 11.7677419355 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 58.1214874552 67% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.1575268817 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 10.9000537634 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.12 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 86.8835125448 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.002688172 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.