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. Other approaches like finding a roommate to share living expenses, or buying new technology produces less frequently, in some people's view, are more effective. 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, buying cheaper food, compared with other approaches, people will save more money because of the discount the food could has. To be more specific, the cheap food, almost expired and less delicious, is preferred by fewer people, resulting in much lower prices. As the food's speed of expire is extremely faster than other products, we can find cheap food everyday. With this kind of food bought frequently, we can definitely keep our budget tight. In contrast, the price of a certain technology product, especially the new generation, will not decrease for month, which means it will still cost much money in comparison to food. Besides, 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.
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 in the restaurants. 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 preparing the meal 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 3, column 286, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
... because of the discount the food could has. To be more specific, the cheap food, a...
^^^
Line 3, column 518, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
... other products, we can find cheap food everyday. With this kind of food bought frequent...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 550, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...st of transportation to the restaurant. Whats more, by preparing the meal at home, pe...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, firstly, however, if, so, still, therefore, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, kind of, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 9.8082437276 234% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 43.0788530466 58% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 52.1666666667 146% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2607.0 1977.66487455 132% => OK
No of words: 520.0 407.700716846 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01346153846 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77530192783 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69649056934 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 212.727598566 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 809.1 618.680645161 131% => 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: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.6248753664 48.9658058833 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.28 100.406767564 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8 20.6045352989 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.56 5.45110844103 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 11.8709677419 168% => 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: 0.254004158584 0.236089414692 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0832015761849 0.076458572812 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0646615127827 0.0737576698707 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202971661255 0.150856017488 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0638692244494 0.0645574589148 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 11.7677419355 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 10.9000537634 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 86.8835125448 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => 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: 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.