The ownership of cars should be restricted to one per family in order to reduce traffic congestion and pollution. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The substantial influences of cars have sparked the controversy among the public around the globe in recent years. While specifically argument claim that car ownership should be restricted to one for each family, a group of luminaries dispute otherwise and hold an opponent's view. I am inclined highly to believe that legislation of owning more than one car per family might be a good idea. The agenda of this article is elaborations of both advantages and disadvantages of private automobiles, which clarifies how it impacts families and industries and thus will lead to a logical conclusion.

At the outset, there are numerous reasons why limiting car's ownership should be supported. The most conspicuous one lies in the fact that the cars damage sustainable environment scheme. For instance, a group of profound environmentalists undertook a longitudinal study to shows that car's internal combustion engines are the main source of higher carbon emission in the atmosphere. Hence, it can be clearly seen that vehicles could result in deforestation, dissertation, global warming, as well as air pollution.

Nevertheless, there remain some drawbacks, which can certainly overwhelm the potential influence of family car, but the most alarming one is rooted in the fact that automobile industries will suffer from any restriction over private automobile ownership. Moreover, it is strongly claimed that legislation over private vehicles might lead to the higher unemployment rate. Therefore, the importance of private transport and its detriments which may affect families and industries adversely could be seen with clarity.

to recapitulate, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, my sentiment is that the benefits of fewer cars per family for outweigh its drawbacks.

Votes
Average: 8.5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
PTE_Academic

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 456, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... vehicles could result in deforestation, dissertation, global warming, as well as...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: To
...dversely could be seen with clarity. to recapitulate, while there are several c...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for instance, as well as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 6.10837438424 180% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 8.36945812808 84% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 20.9802955665 76% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 31.9359605911 94% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.75862068966 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1525.0 1207.87684729 126% => OK
No of words: 275.0 242.827586207 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54545454545 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07223819929 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13034521371 2.71678728327 115% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 139.433497537 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.618181818182 0.580463131201 106% => OK
syllable_count: 477.9 379.143842365 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 6.0 1.56157635468 384% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 1.71428571429 175% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.65517241379 55% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.5507769536 50.4703680194 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.083333333 104.977214359 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9166666667 20.9669160288 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.58333333333 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => 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: 0.238878656793 0.242375264174 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0842189395318 0.0925447433944 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0582745770022 0.071462118173 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138712256207 0.151781067708 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0448591538566 0.0609392437508 74% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 12.6369458128 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.1260098522 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.9458128079 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.21 11.5310837438 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.32886699507 118% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 55.0591133005 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.94827586207 116% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.