Many countries require cigarette smokers to pay particularly high taxes on their purchases of cigarettes; similar taxes are being considered for unhealthy foods. The policy of imposing high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy products has a number of social benefits.
The reading and lecture are both about the advantages and disadvantages of taxation of cigarette and unhealthy foods. The author of the reading passage states that increasing tax on cigarettes is advantageous because it discourages people from using cigarettes or unhealthy foods, it is financially fair, and it increases the government's revenue; however, the lecturer repudiates these ideas. Indeed, she casts doubts on the three main points made in the reading passage by providing three alternative convincing reasons.
To begin with, even though the author mentions that increasing taxes discourages people from using unhealthy foods as well as cigarettes, the lecturer refutes this opinion. She discusses that by increasing taxes on cigarettes or unhealthy foods, people will be inclined to use cheaper cigarettes or foods. As a consequence, it exacerbates people's health condition. In fact, this decision puts the people's health on the brink of jeopardy.
Secondly, although the reading passage says that the taxes are fair, the lecturer holds that these taxation is not considering the people's incomes. For instance, many affluent people should pay taxes as equal as indigent individuals. Furthermore, the same process can be applied to unhealthy foods, too. Thus, this idea is problematic.
Last but not least, on the one hand, in the reading passage, the author mentions that the high rate of taxation on cigarettes or unhealthy foods can be deemed as a profitable revenue for the government. On the other hand, the lecturer claims that the government cannot ignore the zillion dollars of cigarettes' or unhealthy foods' revenues. In other words, the government will support these industries because, in the status quo situation, they can be implied as an appropriate revenue source for it.
To wrap things up, the reading and lecture are both about the pros and cons of taxation on cigarettes and unhealthy foods. Whereas the author buttresses his or her opinions, the three main points in the reading are challenged effectively by the lecturer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 327, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
... financially fair, and it increases the governments revenue; however, the lecturer repudiat...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 398, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'peoples'' or 'people's'?
Suggestion: peoples'; people's
...dition. In fact, this decision puts the peoples health on the brink of jeopardy. Seco...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 94, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this taxation' or 'these taxations'?
Suggestion: this taxation; these taxations
...taxes are fair, the lecturer holds that these taxation is not considering the peoples incomes....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, second, secondly, so, thus, well, whereas, for instance, in fact, as well as, in other words, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1736.0 1373.03311258 126% => OK
No of words: 324.0 270.72406181 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35802469136 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85304742189 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.487654320988 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 526.5 419.366225166 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.5780719979 49.2860985944 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.5 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5625 7.06452816374 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.299076719328 0.272083759551 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100050360809 0.0996497079465 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0831908746394 0.0662205650399 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167667028128 0.162205337803 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0458756038053 0.0443174109184 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.7273730684 144% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.