Should the government increase taxes on cigarettes.
Recently, there has been a ton of debates about whether the government should increase cigarette taxes. The writer in the reading is all for the idea, while the lecturer disagrees and attacks each claim made in the reading.
First, the writer claims that by highering taxes, people will be less inclined to buy them. Thus, building a healthier behavior. The lecturer believes there are some flaws in the author’s opinion.
She contends that just like buying junk food, people will not stop the pursue cigarettes. Increasing taxes just made them more expensive, which means citizens will have less money to spend on healthy products which is not a good sign.
According to the writer, increasing taxes also makes the medical taxes fairer because people who do not smoke will not be taxed income. On the other hand, the lecturer believes it is the exact opposite. She explains that though the wealthy ones pay the same amount as the poor ones, it is definitely more costly for the poor.
The final point the writer states is that by increasing taxes, governments can obtain more money to benefit society in other fields. The author theories that the extra funding could be used to build public facilities. Again, the lecturer rebuts this. She analysis that governments might not issue laws for smoking since smoking brings money. For example, not issuing the outdoor smoking law. Because the more people smoke, the higher the revenue for the government.
As we can see, the lecturer and the writer hold very different opinions on this matter. It is clear that they could not find a common ground.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 68, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... buying junk food, people will not stop the pursue cigarettes. Increasing taxes just made ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, so, thus, while, for example, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1340.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 270.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96296296296 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.28772594213 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.603703703704 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 397.8 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.7485745614 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 74.4444444444 110.228320801 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.0 21.698381199 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.83333333333 7.06452816374 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.09492273731 147% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.212826359503 0.272083759551 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0516267939826 0.0996497079465 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102858384728 0.0662205650399 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0952543891182 0.162205337803 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0870273785912 0.0443174109184 196% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.4 13.3589403974 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.9 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.