Should wealthy nations help poor countries with food and education, or is it the responsibility of poor nations to improve their conditions?
Recently, the phenomenon of wealthy nations should help poor countries with food and education, and its corresponding impacts 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 by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the responsibility of poor countries to improve their conditions can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, wealthy nations' responsibilities to help poor countries to improve their conditions with food and education can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in this fact that the 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 this common phenomenon and complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, poor countries' conditions and wealthy nations' responsibilities might increase the consequences of critical needs. 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 wealthy nations should help poor countries to improve their conditions with food and education far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint the thorny issues' implications.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-11-03 | baran.bahrani | 88 | view |
- Some people claim that public transport should be free of charge, while others disagree. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 88
- Some people point that experiential( i.e learning by doing it) can work well in formal education. What is your opinion? 85
- What do you think of bidding to host sports events? Is it a blessing or a curse? Give your opinions. 88
- The experience of work is more important than having a qualification. Do you agree or disagree? 90
- Should wealthy nations help poor countries with food and education, or is it the responsibility of poor nations to improve their conditions? 88
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, 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: 7.0 6.10837438424 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 20.9802955665 110% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1595.0 1207.87684729 132% => OK
No of words: 277.0 242.827586207 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.75812274368 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27923845434 2.71678728327 121% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595667870036 0.580463131201 103% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 379.143842365 132% => 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: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.931034482759 322% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.4604427353 50.4703680194 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.0 104.977214359 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1818181818 20.9669160288 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.36363636364 7.25397266985 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.506730019447 0.242375264174 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.173665989295 0.0925447433944 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.192857611783 0.071462118173 270% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.312774758426 0.151781067708 206% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0790747576488 0.0609392437508 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 12.6369458128 145% => 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: 16.42 11.5310837438 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.46 8.32886699507 126% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 55.0591133005 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => 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.