Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Over the last century, there has been a breakthrough in mode of transportation, from the cars of Benz to the four-second flying plane of the Wrights brothers. Granted, trains and other engine-based vehicle have been considered the most popular kinds of conveyance. Some ideas have been raised whether or not upgrading railways instead of roads. For me, I am strongly inclined that budget should be well-allocated for both railroad and roadway.
The first argument which lean support to my idea is that private cars play an inevitable role in our daily life. They are considered to be the easiest and most convenient form of transportation. Driving is the ideal solution for short travel which we cannot use trains. Moreover, roads are everywhere and infrastructures are constantly improving. We can easily drive to anywhere we want, from near places like restaurants or hospital to further destinations such as beaches or historic relics. Consequently, authorities allocate budget for maintaining streets will increase the road safety as well as decelerate traffic congestion. Talking about the enhancement of highway systems, we cannot ignore the success of Autobahn in Germany. Autobahn is the net of freeway ran all over the country. This kind of road let drivers speed up to 120 km/h. Easily connect cities to cities.
On the other hand, the expansion of railway helps companies to ship their products to the countryside more quickly. Another opinion is that using the electric train, commonly known as subway, tram or bullet train, can help in reducing exhaust fumes and fossil fuels usage. Furthermore, traveling by trains cause no traffic jam at all, just pay for the tickets, jump on and then get to your location. Thus, traveling by train is way too faster than driving. For instance, the system of bullet train called TGV in France can reach up to 320 km/h, making the travel faster and more comfortable.
All things considered, either traveling by trains or driving should be allocated budget by the governments. Throughout my two examples of two different countries with a leap in traffic technology, I strongly believe that other nations should learn from the predecessors and invest in the development of their traffic system to lull traffic accidents.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-30 | Dungphung | 56 | view |
| 2020-01-29 | BIBHU KALITA | 11 | view |
| 2020-01-29 | tranhien297 | 61 | view |
| 2020-01-28 | pateldhruv1708 | 73 | view |
| 2020-01-26 | geforce | 61 | view |
- Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? 11
- Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? 11
- Some people say that the best way to improve public health is by increasing the number of sports facilities. Others, however, say that this would have little effect on public health and that other measures are required.Discuss both views and give your own 84
- Planting trees is very important for the environment. Some people say trees should be planted in the vacant areas of cities and towns. While others believe housing facilities should be built instead. Do you agree or disagree? 61
- Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school.Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages? 88
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 294, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...conveyance. Some ideas have been raised whether or not upgrading railways instead of roads. Fo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, if, moreover, second, so, then, thus, well, for instance, kind of, such as, talking about, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1910.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 368.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1902173913 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87392619875 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 176.041082164 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.633152173913 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 560.7 506.74238477 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.9861459962 49.4020404114 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.9523809524 106.682146367 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5238095238 20.7667163134 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 7.06120827912 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.054028488767 0.244688304435 22% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0152849133964 0.084324248473 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0235771117445 0.0667982634062 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0348508264536 0.151304729494 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0182997339346 0.056905535591 32% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.0946893788 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 50.2224549098 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.3001002004 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.