Professional workers like doctors, nurses and teachers make a greater contribution to society and so should be paid more than sports and entertainment personalities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of professional workers like doctors make a greater contribution to society and so should be paid more than sports and entertainment personalities and its corresponding imact 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 more money to workers like doctors, nurses and teachers can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, making a great contribution to societies by Professional workers 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, paying the less money to sports and entertainment personalities might increase the consequences of critical needs. Moreover, fundamental aspects of social needs could relate to this reality that the demerits of low-paid workers pertain to Professional qualifications. 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 benefits of making a greater contribution by Professional workers and paying more to them far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the disadvantages of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues' potential implications.
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 : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 6.10837438424 115% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 8.36945812808 119% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 20.9802955665 105% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1730.0 1207.87684729 143% => OK
No of words: 301.0 242.827586207 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.74750830565 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31626036495 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 139.433497537 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621262458472 0.580463131201 107% => OK
syllable_count: 547.2 379.143842365 144% => 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: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => 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: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.4365606679 50.4703680194 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.166666667 104.977214359 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0833333333 20.9669160288 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.25397266985 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.299158905428 0.242375264174 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0908430606274 0.0925447433944 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.120319810013 0.071462118173 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.169531604997 0.151781067708 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.123522597295 0.0609392437508 203% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.2 12.6369458128 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 53.1260098522 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.37 11.5310837438 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.75 8.32886699507 129% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 55.0591133005 203% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => 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.