Governments should not put too much attention on arts, such as theaters. Governments should allocate more funds to areas of concern. Do you agree with this opinion or not? Use your own experience to support your idea.
Recently, the phenomenon of "governments should not put too much attention on arts, such as theaters; governments should allocate more funds to areas of concern" and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debating the proposition that areas of concern might be remarkably fruitful, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a remarkable number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that theaters can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the society standpoint, putting much attention on arts by governments can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that increasing the awareness of societies and arts are inextricably bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the importance of arts such as painting. Thus, invaluable ramifications of both being an artist and improving reputation of the society distinctly can be observed.
Within the realm of economics science, without the slightest doubt, allocating more funds to areas of concern might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of governmental budgets. Moreover, fundamental aspects of allocating funds can relate to the reality that the demerits of the role of governments can pertain to financial policies. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of the lack of funds were correlated positively with areas of concern such as climate change, the local authorities would ultimately address allocation strategies. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of financial benefits of arts.
To conclude, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt to vigorously support the idea that the merits of putting too much attention on arts by governments far outweigh its downsides.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 214, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nd its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, moreover, regarding, so, thus, whereas, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 6.10837438424 196% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 31.9359605911 144% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.75862068966 174% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1689.0 1207.87684729 140% => OK
No of words: 299.0 242.827586207 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.64882943144 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26592695887 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 139.433497537 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595317725753 0.580463131201 103% => OK
syllable_count: 524.7 379.143842365 138% => 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: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.5024630542 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.1882098762 50.4703680194 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.545454545 104.977214359 146% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1818181818 20.9669160288 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.27272727273 7.25397266985 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
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: 0.345082012415 0.242375264174 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106678586617 0.0925447433944 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.097530546481 0.071462118173 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19305401067 0.151781067708 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0655746438471 0.0609392437508 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.8 12.6369458128 149% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 53.1260098522 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.9458128079 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 11.5310837438 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.57 8.32886699507 127% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 55.0591133005 193% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.3980295567 123% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 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.