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 transport.
discuss both views and give your opinion
Transportation is one of the most topics that attracts great attention. Some people claim that the authorities should spend the budget on redeveloping railway systems. Whereas others suppose investing in public transport is more necessary. This essay aims to discuss both views and express my opinion.
On the one hand, expanding novel road lines is considered having several problems. Although modifying the communication system may bring positive impacts on regulating the volume of commuters. The government requires taking more effort on either rearrange railway systems or demolish numerous buildings (recreational places, educational centers or resident houses) to make room for the new roads. Because of the lack of landscapes and population growth, it is simply quite a mission impossible.
On the other hand, spending finance on the quality of public transportation is by far more beneficial. Firstly, it is one of the most convenient ways for any individuals to reach their destination regardless of hustle and bustle city at a reasonable price. For example, workers can commute to the company on time without worrying about traffic jams. Secondly, using public means of public transport may contribute to alleviating traffic congestion instead of using private vehicles. Therefore, the number of exhausted fumes and air pollution which is emitted by manifold vehicles tend to decline. To be more eco-friendly, using the public transportation system should be highly encouraged.
In conclusion, from my perspective, the government should take into account investing money in upgrading the quality of transportation rather than expanding road systems.
| 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 |
- percentage change in house prices 73
- the positive and negative development of technology 95
- the unlimited use of cars may cause many problems. what are those problems? in order to reduce the problem, should we discourage people to use car? 61
- the plans below show the layout of a university's sports center now and how it will look after redevelopment.summerise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- some people think that strict punishment for driving offences are the key to reducing traffic accidents. Others,however, believe that other measures could be more effective in improving road safety. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 169, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...budget on redeveloping railway systems. Whereas others suppose investing in public tran...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 84, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... is considered having several problems. Although modifying the communication system may ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, for example, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 24.0651302605 33% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1418.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 250.0 315.596192385 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.672 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05722488541 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.652 0.561755894193 116% => OK
syllable_count: 434.7 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.9047930127 49.4020404114 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.5333333333 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6666666667 20.7667163134 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.8 7.06120827912 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211655958297 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0616697687226 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0486747552168 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115530058632 0.151304729494 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528131982713 0.056905535591 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.0946893788 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 50.2224549098 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.31 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.05 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.