To start with, housing is likely the largest expense and for those living in mega cities rent payments account for over 40% of their paycheck. However, finding just one roommate can shave 30%-50% off basic living expenses, including rent, utilities, and even food if they are willing to share groceries.
The second option is less effective. Electronic products tend to be durable: for instance, new iPhones should last a minimum of three years and Android phones are designed to last two years minimum. So a majority of users already do not buy new ones frequently. If one buys new products habitually, chances are that he does not fall short of money at all. Admittedly, a few tech enthusiasts prefer to spend a significant amount of savings buying latest gadgets. Yet, such behavior makes sense to them, because it is their lifelong hobby. It’s hard to persuade them to sacrifice their passion to save money.
The last method is impractical. Today’s employees are as busy as a bee. Some of them even follow a 996 schedule, working from 9 am to 9 pm for six days per week, leaving nearly no time for shopping groceries and cooking. When they return home after a day’s back-breaking work, all they want is a quick dinner and a good rest. Buying ingredients, cooking at home and cleaning up, though cheaper than eating outside or ordering and eating takeout food, take a lot of time and are the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
To sum up, living with others can lower monthly spending markedly, whereas the other two choices cannot.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 440, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'buying the latest'.
Suggestion: buying the latest
...o spend a significant amount of savings buying latest gadgets. Yet, such behavior makes sense...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, second, so, thus, whereas, for instance, to start with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 12.0772626932 25% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1288.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 266.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84210526316 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03850299372 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50940905633 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 145.348785872 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.710526315789 0.540411800872 131% => OK
syllable_count: 379.8 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.23620309051 36% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.5951986654 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.8666666667 110.228320801 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7333333333 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 7.06452816374 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0471078982239 0.272083759551 17% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0123464373927 0.0996497079465 12% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.020009902459 0.0662205650399 30% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0272101805735 0.162205337803 17% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.012472962246 0.0443174109184 28% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 53.8541721854 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.