No one can deny the fact that in the past few decades people’s inclination towards unhealthy food has been escalating drastically. However, consuming unhealthy drinks and food packages can be very problematic and troublesome for people’s health. In this regard, some people contend that rising taxation on these types of food items can be an effective way to reduce their consumption. On the other hand, there is a group of people who take it as an exaggeration and think in the opposite way. Certainly, from my vantage point, the latter view contains more weight. For the following paragraphs, I will delve into the most conspicuous reasons and examples justifying my stance.
The first exquisite reason to be mentioned is that although increasing taxation on food and drinks might look effective theoretically, it would not create a distinct difference in reality. To be more specific, the government cannot raise taxes on a high scale, and in such a scenario, each of the food products would become a little costlier. In fact, this increased cost is negligible for most people. Besides that, the young generation would not stop consuming it since they do not realize the long-term negative consequences of consuming these food items. To shed more light on this children are a particularly compelling example of this. It is unlikely that they are fully able to understand the effect of eating a lot of sugar and salts on their future health and wellbeing. Therefore, they continue buying these products despite the government is trying to raise taxation. Ultimately, elevating taxation on a few food products is not a wise idea.
Another noteworthy point is that irrefutably human beings are living very sophisticated lifestyles these days in which they get very little time in the kitchen due to their higher workload at the workplace. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that they prefer such food choices which are easy to grab and consume. To exemplify, soft drinks which contain high sugar level is a great combination with other food dishes in daily life. Hence, it is less likely that people will discontinue their habit of having soft drinks. Admittedly, instead of increasing taxation, the government can enhance awareness among people about consuming high sugary and salty foods and their effects on their health.
To recapitulate, from contemplating all remarks, in spite of the fact that some people may not agree with my opinion, I strongly believe that the political party should not be taxing people who are consuming food products which are not good for their health. This is because little cost difference would not make big difference in people’s lives, and it is hard to eliminate such foods and drinks in their lives since they have become very dependent on them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 582, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...these food items. To shed more light on this children are a particularly compelling ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, hence, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, well, in fact, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 15.1003584229 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.0752688172 211% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2342.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 460.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09130434783 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75850292265 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 212.727598566 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526086956522 0.524837075471 100% => OK
syllable_count: 720.9 618.680645161 117% => 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: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.94265232975 243% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8940828269 48.9658058833 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.523809524 100.406767564 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9047619048 20.6045352989 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.09523809524 5.45110844103 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => 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: 0.312849625422 0.236089414692 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0855261904247 0.076458572812 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0674440808106 0.0737576698707 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.197776737899 0.150856017488 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0501192294191 0.0645574589148 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 11.7677419355 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 86.8835125448 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.