Do you think consumer should avoid over packed products or it is the responsibility of producer to avoid extra packaging of products? Give your views or any relevant example.
While the questions of preserving of movable products from prejudice events in transit or packing the edible items to preserve nutrition , answer is one to get packaging as layer or protection. Some people believe that packaging provide ease of transient safety , extra packaging must be avoided by consumers and other argue it's responsibility of producer. In this essay, I shall discuss both views by analyzing this arguments and provide the logical conclusion.
Firstly, there are equivocal reasons why packaging is required and why precision layer of packaging must be address by product producers only. It is claimed that mobile companies such as Philips, Samsung , TV companies such as LG, Apple and many more who have policies and regulation for packaging their products in specific layer. Some edible items such as sugar, wheat, pulses and milk products require proper level of packaging. In spite of consumers, companies are better for adequate level of packing.
Secondly, those argue for onus to avoid extra level of packaging must go to consumers are correct view and consider it as right thing. It is argued that if consumers reject and give feedback to companies to avoid extra packing as direct impact happens on their business. This route has direct influences on their sales team to follow adequate level of packing. This has been seen that people using products have direct experience for safety of the products.
In recapitulate, while there are preponderant views of this argument and producers are having more onus to follow adequate level of packing of commodities in market. I would recommend that regime of sales department must campaign in consumers to have right to know for level of packing to avoid devastate conditions of product.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
While the questions of preserving of mov...
^^
Line 1, column 139, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...g the edible items to preserve nutrition , answer is one to get packaging as layer...
^^
Line 1, column 264, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ckaging provide ease of transient safety , extra packaging must be avoided by cons...
^^
Line 1, column 415, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...I shall discuss both views by analyzing this arguments and provide the logical concl...
^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ts and provide the logical conclusion. Firstly, there are equivocal reasons why...
^^
Line 2, column 163, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oduct producers only. It is claimed that mobile companies such as Philips, Samsun...
^^
Line 2, column 206, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...obile companies such as Philips, Samsung , TV companies such as LG, Apple and many...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...better for adequate level of packing. Secondly, those argue for onus to avoid ...
^^
Line 3, column 125, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'rights'?
Suggestion: rights
...ers are correct view and consider it as right thing. It is argued that if consumers r...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...experience for safety of the products. In recapitulate, while there are prepond...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, while, such as, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 8.36945812808 131% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 5.94088669951 101% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 31.9359605911 125% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1475.0 1207.87684729 122% => OK
No of words: 284.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19366197183 5.00649968141 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68559982687 2.71678728327 99% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 139.433497537 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528169014085 0.580463131201 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 468.0 379.143842365 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.6157635468 152% => OK
Article: 0.0 1.56157635468 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.3956931988 50.4703680194 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.461538462 104.977214359 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8461538462 20.9669160288 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.30769230769 7.25397266985 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.33497536946 187% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 6.9802955665 57% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 2.75862068966 217% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268340920431 0.242375264174 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0958131354031 0.0925447433944 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0665319274049 0.071462118173 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171822932082 0.151781067708 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0330405811854 0.0609392437508 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 12.6369458128 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.1260098522 94% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.54236453202 47% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.9458128079 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 11.5310837438 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.32886699507 108% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 55.0591133005 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.94827586207 106% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 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.