Downtown Zurzi is becoming increasingly congested with traffic, increasing commuting time for those who work downtown or near downtown. The nearby city of Loft was faced with the same problem several years ago and implemented a small weekly tax for drivin

Essay topics:

Downtown Zurzi is becoming increasingly congested with traffic, increasing commuting time for those who work downtown or near downtown. The nearby city of Loft was faced with the same problem several years ago and implemented a small weekly tax for driving one’s car downtown. Downtown traffic almost immediately subsided in Loft and the local government also raised much needed money for fixing roads elsewhere. Obviously, this plan should be implemented in Zurzi in order to solve the brewing traffic congestion problem.

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

The passage talks about introducing a plan to solve the congestion crisis in Zurzi which is similar to the nearby city Loft. The author of the argument cites that Loft faced the same problem several years ago and it was solved with the introduction of a weekly tax for driving downtown. He further supports his claim by telling that the downtown traffic immediately decreased and even the government was able to get much necessary funds for other roads. But, the argument is still in much need of more evidence in order to become cogent and well-placed so that it can be presented to the relevant authorities.

First of all, most of the cities have different road maps and architectures and a scheme does not guarantee success if replicated from one city to another. Given the case of city of Loft, which benefitted from introducing the tax, we might not be sure whether the city of Zurzi has same kind of city structure and introducing this scheme won't cause traffic congestion elsewhere or not. It might be possible that the people start parking around downtown where taxes are not there and cause even more congestion at those places. Therefore, we might need to get the evidence about the traffic situation around the downtown in Loft after the scheme was introduced there and have a logical comparison between the road structure around downtown for both the cities before moving forward.

There is a huge question mark on the extent of the congestion that is observed in the city currently. Even though it is assumed that the implementation of the schemes will make people to choose the downtown area for driving less likely, it is not completely known whether that would be enough and commute time will reduce? Also, in that case, the people might become low-spirited with seeing both the tax as well as the congestion at the same time. Hence, there is a great need to know the number of vehicles that pass through downtown regularly and take a wise decision accordingly. The same observation is necessary in Loft since, the scheme might not be working well now because of the population and increase in vehicles.

In conclusion, the argument presented here needs a lot of improvement and variety of more specifics related to city structure of Zurzi and vehicle numbers is needed. Without these evidences, the argument is incomplete and a thorough study is required for major plan like this.

Votes
Average: 4.5 (3 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2019-10-29 singlade 45 view
2018-12-02 Bishwas K.C. 50 view
2018-10-12 rali 35 view
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 406, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...e low-spirited with seeing both the tax as well as the congestion at the same time. Hence,...
^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, hence, if, so, still, therefore, well, in conclusion, kind of, as well as, first of all

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2003.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 410.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88536585366 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60800602365 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509756097561 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 632.7 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5999478351 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.533333333 119.503703932 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3333333333 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.86666666667 5.70786347227 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.383634778058 0.218282227539 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116677419579 0.0743258471296 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0950031925051 0.0701772020484 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.209697129472 0.128457276422 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0996351517793 0.0628817314937 158% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?

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

Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 411 350
No. of Characters: 1961 1500
No. of Different Words: 204 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.503 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.771 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.561 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 130 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 98 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.003 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.533 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.331 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.545 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.086 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5