Some cities have vehicles-free days, when private cars, trucks, motorcycles are banned in the city centre. Public transportations like buses, taxis and metros are advised. To what extend do you think advantages outweigh disadvantages?
Recent years have witnessed a soaring traffic volume on the main roads of most metropolitan are as owing to contemporary citizens over-reliance on non public motor transport. Although to advocate or even to not allow the locals to use private vehicles downtown either on a particular day annually or on a more regular basis has gained its popularity among government worldwide. This essay will examine both sides of the argument before conclusion is drawn.
Admittedly, there are some arguments in favor of some cities have vehicles-free days and use public transport. First, government subsidies for public transport are believed to equalize the environmental impact opportunities and raise awareness among young adolescents regardless of their background. This vehicle- free days support, presumably, tends not only to increase the overall in the use of public transport is maximized rate of lower-income people but also to mitigate harmful emissions into the environment. Second, use public transport would probably result in a greater supply of highly qualified workers, which benefits society in the long run. In fact, it is acknowledged that living conditions and environment human capital is imperative to foster economic growth and technological development in any nations.
Nevertheless, the resultant problems would be far more significant than the minor benefits once some cities have vehicles- free days and just use public transport. First, offering all people used public transport would likely correspond with a tremendous financial strain on a country. Generating no income from personal vehicles tuition and fees, car companies could become over-reliant on the state budget for funding, meaning that there would be less input to develop other important areas such as healthcare system and transport infrastructure. Second, use public transport so much would tempt many young people including those who are not drive inclined or show no interest to walking pursuits, thereby adding great burdens for public transport service and enrollment staff and potentially wasting time that these people could have spent pursuing more suitable transport paths. It, instead, would be a more transport viable option if the resources were focused on supporting less privileged yet gifted people.
In conclusion, in this life, transport becomes an important part. Personally, I hold positive attitude towards increased cooperation in terms of globalization economic matters and lesson exchange, however, we also should be alert to the potential risk of this trend.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-04 | Trần Ánh Vy | 89 | view |
- Some people believe that technology causes more problems for modern society than solve Do you agree or disagree 89
- The table shows the information of total health expenditure per capita in five countries in 2019 Summaries the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The chart below give information about how many Europe citizens of various age groups who frequently go to the gym from 1990 to 2010 67
- In some countries more and more are becoming interested in finding out about the history of the house or building they live in What are the reason for this How can people can research this 73
- Nowadays in many countries household waste e g food packaging is increasing day by day What are the causes for that How can this problem be solved 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 321, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'vehicles'' or 'vehicle's'?
Suggestion: vehicles'; vehicle's
...try. Generating no income from personal vehicles tuition and fees, car companies could b...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2182.0 1615.20841683 135% => OK
No of words: 389.0 315.596192385 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.60925449871 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94778476861 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 251.0 176.041082164 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.645244215938 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 684.9 506.74238477 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 67.0570569656 49.4020404114 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.466666667 106.682146367 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9333333333 20.7667163134 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.86666666667 7.06120827912 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202964870397 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0745584329383 0.084324248473 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0838410588652 0.0667982634062 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110897618749 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669068803999 0.056905535591 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.0 13.0946893788 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 50.2224549098 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.28 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 78.4519038076 170% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.