In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transportDisucss both the
It is thought by some that spending large amount of money to build new railways for high-speed trains between cities is a requirement, while others say that it is better to spend money to improve and develop existing public transport. In my opinion, I believe that both statements should be considered since these two ideas will be beneficial in different ways.
On the one hand, some people believe that high-speed trains, which will be used for transportation between cities, are very significant and suitable railways should be constructed, even if construction of the railway lines require large sums of money. High-speed trains, which can reach 350 km/h, are commonly used all around the world and this type of trains reduces the amount of time spent on transportation considerably, especially between cities which are far away from each other. Moreover, extending the railway lines for very fast trains on a country might also improve trading activities among cities because high-speed trains are much faster.
On the other hand, others tend to spend money to improve existing public transport modes. Since people do not travel between cities frequently, it might be beneficial to pay attention on public transport which is used currently. Development of current public transport will increase the number of citizens who use this type of transport. Consequently, traffic congestion and air pollution might decline considerably which is commonly caused by excessive personal car usage.
In conclusion, I think that large sums of money should spend both on new railway lines for high-speed trains and improving existing public transport. High-speed trains will be effective for greater distances, whereas improved public transport, which is currently used, will encourage citizens to use public transportation more frequently.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-20 | MinyiChu | 67 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 67 | view |
| 2023-12-30 | Tường Vân | 73 | view |
- The plans below show the layout of a university s sports centre now and how it will look after redevelopment 83
- Many museums charge for admission while others are free.Do you think the advantages of charging people for admission to museums outweigh the disadvantages? 73
- The chart below shows how frequently people in the USA ate in fast food restaurants between 2003 and 2013 73
- The graph below shows the consumption of 3 spreads from 1981 to 2007 73
- Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 360, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...type of transport. Consequently, traffic congestion and air pollution might decli...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, if, moreover, so, whereas, while, i think, in conclusion, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1558.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.48591549296 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85189531427 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 176.041082164 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.528169014085 0.561755894193 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 457.2 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.0144607992 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.636363636 106.682146367 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8181818182 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06120827912 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.434648634335 0.244688304435 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.18976394854 0.084324248473 225% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.151167323098 0.0667982634062 226% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.240718680859 0.151304729494 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.136046213667 0.056905535591 239% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 13.0946893788 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 50.2224549098 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.3001002004 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.58950901804 99% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 78.4519038076 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 9.78957915832 189% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.