Recently, the phenomenon of a card-less society and its corresponding imapct has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive. I am inclined to believe that paying cash in a card-less society can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, some card-less societies can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both this common phenomenon and accordingly complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, a realistic cash-less society might increase the consequences of critical needs. Moreover, fundamental aspects of financial transactions could relate to this reality that the demerits of idle balance pertain to suspense accounts and the cash ratio. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the cash ratio in the card-less society far outweighs its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues' potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... notion of this remarkable phenomenon. To conclude, while there are several com...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 31.9359605911 94% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1504.0 1207.87684729 125% => OK
No of words: 264.0 242.827586207 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69696969697 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18372958461 2.71678728327 117% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 139.433497537 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.651515151515 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 479.7 379.143842365 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.889490879 50.4703680194 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.333333333 104.977214359 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.9669160288 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.25397266985 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211625313845 0.242375264174 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0724990849823 0.0925447433944 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0796216575562 0.071462118173 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126343129207 0.151781067708 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0399667504982 0.0609392437508 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 12.6369458128 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.78 11.5310837438 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.25 8.32886699507 135% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.