The government and coporation should share all their scientific discoveries with other countries in the world. Government and business should not keep any discoveries secret
Ever since the Industrial Revolution, science and technology has been the booster of the social productivity, contributing to our social well-being and quality of lives. Technological advancement is also the key that could turn a small business to the bellwether of the industry. For instance, the invention of personal computers and smartphone has turned Apple to one of the largest high-tech firm. Because of the drastical impact of science and technology, firms and government often make them the top secret to outcompete other firms and countries. While some people may condemn this as selfish, I would delve into the reasons of agreeing it from an economist's perspective.
To commence with, science discoveries, once being publicize and accessible to all, would be considered as a public good by an economist. Because of its accessibility, firms that make no contribution to the discoveries would also benefit from it. Scientific breakthrough would therefore be discouraged because people tend to freeride the products. Technological advancement is a ardous process that requires efforts of hundreds of scientists and millions in capital. Under no circumstances should we ignored these efforts and take away the fruit of their intelligence and diligence. If their efforts are not endowed, they would be greatly discouraged and refused to work.
Despite the manifest reason above, critics may still claim that undisclosing scientific discoveries would diminish the social surplus as it would lead to monopolization. For instance, pharmaceutical firms may sell their products at an unaffordable price to most of the patients. However, this is specious. Even a monopolize firm could not sell their products extremely expensive because of the diminishing profit, not to mention about the anti-trust law set by the government. Moreover, when a neccessary product is unaffordable, the government could subsidize the consumers, which would make the product affordable while encouraging scientific investigation.
Judging from the above evidence, we could arrive to a conclusion that government and firms are never ought to be required to share their scientific discoveries because this would only decrease social productivity and there are many alternatives to increase social well-being.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 654, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'economists'' or 'economist's'?
Suggestion: economists'; economist's
...into the reasons of agreeing it from an economists perspective. To commence with, science...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 376, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... products. Technological advancement is a ardous process that requires efforts of...
^
Line 3, column 311, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...tients. However, this is specious. Even a monopolize firm could not sell their products extr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, therefore, well, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 43.0788530466 56% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 52.1666666667 86% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 8.0752688172 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1944.0 1977.66487455 98% => OK
No of words: 346.0 407.700716846 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.61849710983 4.8611393121 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.48103885553 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22515381968 2.67179642975 121% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 212.727598566 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.57225433526 0.524837075471 109% => OK
syllable_count: 603.0 618.680645161 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9162416899 48.9658058833 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.352941176 100.406767564 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3529411765 20.6045352989 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05882352941 5.45110844103 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.159178560283 0.236089414692 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0434609568602 0.076458572812 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0410582306993 0.0737576698707 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0985218005952 0.150856017488 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0305798446751 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: 15.2 11.7677419355 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 58.1214874552 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 10.9000537634 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.69 8.01818996416 121% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 86.8835125448 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.