In times of an economic crisis, in which area should governments reduce its spending?
1. Arts 2. Scientific research 3. Parks and public gardens.
As an economic crisis becomes substantial gradually, governments are likely to adopt the strategy of cost reduction. Arts, scientific research, and parks are three options for governments to cut down on the spending in. Which one is the most suitable option? From my perspective, I think art is the answer to the question.
In the first place, extremely few people consider arts a significant part of their daily lives. Since most people are occupied with working, they don't have sufficient leisure time to appreciate the works in art galleries. For instance, according to a survey in my country, the average number of people entering an art museum one day is about 50, whereas the capacity of the museum is supposed to be 500. Such phenomenon demonstrates that people's need for arts is far less than governments used to expect. Therefore, cutting down on the spending on arts does not compromise the citizens' life quality tremendously. With a view to both alleviating the stress caused by economic crisis and taking people's need into consideration, governments should consider arts the highest priority for cost reduction.
Secondly, investments in arts cannot yield considerable profits. A prodigious amount of money has to be spent on preserving the fragile artworks. Such expenditures are much heavier than the incomes derived from the investments. To be specific, costs of electricity in museum and hiring art experts are 10 thousand US dollars, but the incomes coming from tourists' tickets are only 1 thousand US dollars. If the investments in arts are not worthwhile, they can not solve the problem of economic crisis. Therefore, governments are supposed to utilize the limited money on areas that have potential to increase incomes rather than arts. For example, money spent on scientific research stimulates the development of technological industries, which brings profits 10 times more than costs.
Lastly, private companies are even more likely to make profitable investments in arts compared with governments. Many enterprises have abundant experience in business, which is due to their aims to maximize profits. If they take on the responsibility for encouraging arts in the country, their performance will definitely be better than unexperienced governments'. Consider the issue of staff management, private companies know how to hire a group of experts proficient in maintenance of art works with relatively low personnel costs. In this way, the companies can gain incomes, and governments can save funds for solving financial problems while ensuring the quality of art industries in the country. Such win-win situation justifies governments' decisions to reduce the expenses of arts.
Undeniably, some people may argue that governments should avoid decreasing the investment in art. For example, spending money providing a favorable environment for artists draws international attention to the country. Nevertheless, international research seminars and green park construction are also methods that elevates the country's status in the world. Accordingly, I think it is reasonable for governments to spend less on arts.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 147, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... people are occupied with working, they dont have sufficient leisure time to appreci...
^^^^
Line 3, column 578, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'citizens'' or 'citizen's'?
Suggestion: citizens'; citizen's
...pending on arts does not compromise the citizens life quality tremendously. With a view ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, while, as to, for example, for instance, i think, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 43.0788530466 42% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 52.1666666667 130% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2662.0 1977.66487455 135% => OK
No of words: 486.0 407.700716846 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47736625514 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69525374022 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07444315522 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 212.727598566 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543209876543 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 813.6 618.680645161 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.1565255095 48.9658058833 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.5925925926 100.406767564 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 20.6045352989 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.37037037037 5.45110844103 117% => 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: 9.0 4.88709677419 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280505525231 0.236089414692 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0702627570185 0.076458572812 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0494054808986 0.0737576698707 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163897278607 0.150856017488 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0609704973661 0.0645574589148 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 11.7677419355 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 58.1214874552 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 10.9000537634 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 86.8835125448 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.002688172 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.