tpo 53
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.
The reading states that imposing taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy foods is beneficial and provides three benefits for it. However, the professor finds all the ideas dubious and unconvincing and presents some counter evidence to refute them all.
First, the reading states that enhancing the taxes will discourage individuals to buy these kinds of productions. Conversely, the professor refutes this point by stating that increasing the taxes will not lead to buying them less than before. Actually, by doing so, human beings will buy cheaper cigarettes, which have lower quality. Furthermore, people will spend more money to buy unhealthy foods; therefore, low amount of money will left for them to buy healthy foods. Consequently, the more taxes will not lead to the less buying harmful products.
Second, the article claims that more taxes on these products is just. On the contrary, the lecturer extend that there are some arguments about this assertion. She explains that the governments do not consider individuals’ income. In other words, two persons who purchase cigarettes, and gain different incomes, have to pay the same amount of taxes, which is not fair. Since in this way, the low earner has to pay more money as tax rather than the high earner. Therefore, more taxes without taking into account human beings’ income is totally unfair.
Third, the reading avers that by increasing the taxes the governments will attain a hoard of money. In contrast, the professor opposes this point by saying that harmful products are a reliable source of income for the governments and they do not want to lose it. Thus the authorities will not eliminate these productions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 436, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'leave'
Suggestion: leave
...ds; therefore, low amount of money will left for them to buy healthy foods. Conseque...
^^^^
Line 4, column 263, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...nments and they do not want to lose it. Thus the authorities will not eliminate thes...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, consequently, conversely, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, therefore, third, thus, as to, in contrast, in other words, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => 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: 1421.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20512820513 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68870956395 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.549450549451 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 424.8 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.1177768502 49.2860985944 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 88.8125 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0625 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.75 7.06452816374 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0616447604225 0.272083759551 23% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0218841027346 0.0996497079465 22% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0254435674646 0.0662205650399 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0407850691944 0.162205337803 25% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0230846733691 0.0443174109184 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.64 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => 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.