Should the government focus more on preserving natural environment and less on economic development?
When it comes to whether government should focus more on preserving natural environment or more on economic, people from different fields tend to hold different point of views. The tree huggers argue that governments should prioritize environmental preservation over the economic development. However, I do not agree with this idea. In my opinion, these two goals are not mutually exclusive and developing economy is as important as preserving natural environment.
To begin with, I agree with the idea that modern people are facing at severe environmental problems and the responsibility to remedy these problems falls on human being. After the second industrial revolution, the productivity, the capacity of human being to transforming nature has been improved exponentially. As a result, thousands of hectares of wild areas have turned into artificial spaces. According to research conducted by MIT’s urban and regional study department, in recent fifty years, human’s activities have decreased forests’ areas by 40% and have driven over thousand species to extinction. Except for the problem of biodiversity, the problem of pollution is also worth human’s attentions. In this regard, isn’t it imperative that government allocate more tax revenues on environmental improvement?
However, remedying environment is a time-consuming and money-demanding process. Without a strong economic support, the career of environmental protection cannot be sustained. Contrary to the deterioration of environment, improvement of it takes a relative long process. For instance, the restoration of one hectare of wet zone takes ten years and the growth of a poplar tree needs twenty years. In addition to the time, a huge amount of money is needed. If governments only prioritize the improvement of environment and neglect the development of economy, the governmental tax revenues will soon make ends meet. In this case, the career of environmental protection could not be bolstered, let alone to guarantee the development of other aspects of society, such as the promotion of education, the coverage of medical assurance. Under these circumstances, but for to develop economy, governments could not improve both the well-being of both the environment and the society.
Government should regard the development of economy as important as the preservation of environment. Because these two problems are mutually exclusive. By combining these two problems, governments can find innovative and efficient resolution to save these two problems at the same time. The high-quality environment could boost the tourist’s industry and stimulate local economy. The flourishing tourist’s industry provide the stable financial support to the further environmental amelioration. Take the Yellow River park in China as an example. The local government separated this area into two parts. One part is a park, opened to the public where people can rent an open space to do barbecue. Another part is a protected wet area where the specialists are working on the renovation of riverbanks and the restoration of biodiversity. The Yellow River project has already been carried out for ten years and the combination of economic and environmental concerns makes this project a role models for many other projects.
To sum up, in order to resolve the urgent environmental problem, governments should elaborate a long-term plan according their economic power. Giving equal weights to the environmental preservation and the economic development helps government to gain the result of double win.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 102, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ant as the preservation of environment. Because these two problems are mutually exclusi...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 528, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (River) must be used with a third-person verb: 'parks'.
Suggestion: parks
...tal amelioration. Take the Yellow River park in China as an example. The local gover...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, second, so, well, except for, for instance, in addition, such as, as a result, in my opinion, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 43.0788530466 49% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 52.1666666667 146% => OK
Nominalization: 42.0 8.0752688172 520% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3065.0 1977.66487455 155% => OK
No of words: 541.0 407.700716846 133% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66543438078 4.8611393121 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82280071112 4.48103885553 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31573305787 2.67179642975 124% => OK
Unique words: 288.0 212.727598566 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.532347504621 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 979.2 618.680645161 158% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.51630824373 119% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 14.0 3.08781362007 453% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 14.0 4.94265232975 283% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.6003584229 146% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.163188798 48.9658058833 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.166666667 100.406767564 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0333333333 20.6045352989 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.73333333333 5.45110844103 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => 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: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.286895764639 0.236089414692 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0709402203373 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0944282747495 0.0737576698707 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192267064866 0.150856017488 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.136146938909 0.0645574589148 211% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 11.7677419355 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 58.1214874552 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.31 10.9000537634 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 160.0 86.8835125448 184% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.