Your friend is going to reduce the living expenses. Which of the following way would
you recommend to your friend and why?
1. Find a roommate that can share the living expenses.
2. Buy the new technology products less frequently.
3. Shop for less expensive food to cook at home.
Reducing living expenses, one of the most common goals of each family, has been valued and triggered heated discussion on which is the effective way to save money. Finding a roommate to share house rent and living expenses, or buying new technology produces less frequently, in some people's view, are much better ways. Contrary to these opinions is my perspective that the best solution is shopping for less expensive food and cooking at home.
To begin with, shopping for less expensive food will considerably decrease the daily cost by purchasing discounted foods and fostering the habit of thrift. Firstly, more money could be saved, with cheaper food bought, compared with other approaches. To be more specific, the cheap food, almost expired and less delicious, is preferred by fewer people, resulting in lower prices. If we buy this kind of food frequently, we can keep our budget tight. What should be emphasized is that, never should we ignore the positive effect of consuming cheap food. Purchasing less expensive food regularly could increase the awareness of saving money on other consumption. This influence is neglected by most people. For instance, once we adapt to this kind of life, we will gradually incline to reduce expenses in other aspects of life, such as clothing or entertainment. However, this kind of habit won't be fostered when people only decrease the frequency of buying technology devices, which is still very expensive in comparison to food.
What is equally significant is that cooking at home, healthy and meaningful activity in daily life, will also help decline the living costs. More money, to be paid in restaurants, will be saved by cooking at home. going to the restaurants with friends, regular in everyone's life will cost a great amount of money because we have to pay for the service in the way of tips to the waiters. This partition of life expensive can be saved if we cook at home. At the same time, we also save the cost of transportation to the restaurant. what's more, by cooking at home, people will become more healthy since they can control the ingredient in the food, instead of depending on the cook in the restaurant. We can make more healthy food for ourselves and keep a balanced diet, reducing the possibility of obesity and heart disease. Besides, the fewer people eat in the restaurant, the fewer risks people will take to get sick. Therefore, cooking at home could lower the frequency of going to the hospital, reducing life expenses potentially. This can not be achieved by just sharing expenses with roommates.
In conclusion, living expenses, a significant element in people's life, can be effectively decreased if we can shop for less expensive food and cook at home due to the positive impact on thrift and healthy habit.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 215, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Going
...ants, will be saved by cooking at home. going to the restaurants with friends, regula...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 531, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Whats
...st of transportation to the restaurant. whats more, by cooking at home, people will b...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 531, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...st of transportation to the restaurant. whats more, by cooking at home, people will b...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, firstly, however, if, so, still, therefore, for instance, in conclusion, kind of, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 9.8082437276 194% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 43.0788530466 56% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2328.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 468.0 407.700716846 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97435897436 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68047528776 2.67179642975 100% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 212.727598566 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.487179487179 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 724.5 618.680645161 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.7403467473 48.9658058833 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.217391304 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.347826087 20.6045352989 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.47826086957 5.45110844103 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 11.8709677419 152% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255415337971 0.236089414692 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0857435527407 0.076458572812 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0679733073375 0.0737576698707 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202483636398 0.150856017488 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0642725035409 0.0645574589148 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 58.1214874552 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 10.9000537634 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 86.8835125448 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.002688172 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.