Living in large cities today poses many problems for people.
What are these problems? Should governments encourage more people to live in smaller towns?
Does total urbanization introduce more obstacles than solutions to the everyday routine of citizens? It is an open secret that hustle and bustle of metropolitan cities could put the nerve system of people under a lot of pressure while nature of the rural areas can nurture the positivity and stress-free mind. Thus, some experts claim that metapolicies create a vast majority of troubles such, as traffic jams and shortage of residential space, for people and one possible solution to ease the cause and effect of the mentioned issue is to propose governmental incentives with the aim to motivate citizen to migrate to urban, unpopulated regions.
The cost of living in the big cities is increasing dramatically over the past few decades, since more and more people move to well-developed areas with advanced economies to pursue the dream of better life. The straightforward result is that there appear issues connected with environmental situation, air pollution, overpopulation, and lack of housing. Taking a deeper look, one can conclude that traffic is one of the greatest issues. For example, in Moscow or New York it could take more that 5 hours to commute to work in rush hours, while in Mumbai people can hardy drive at all, as lots of different vehicles are at roads at once making it impossible. What is more, overpopulation creates peaked demand for rental and personal housing, while supply cannot satisfy 100 percent of desired. This fact does definitely not ease the problem with the poor living in slumps, such that as in Mexico City, often without proper sanitation and needed facilities.
The only solution is the introduction of governmental incentives to encourage people to move to some less populated regions. One proposition is to smoothly motivate citizens to follow downshifting schemes by creating smart advertising and street banners with the message stating the advantages of rural areas. The second path is investment in rural infrastructure, such as well-planned school facilities, improved medicine and healthcare, and more importantly housing options. It is evident that the aforementioned transformations will encourage people not to move to big cities or even will stimulate citizens to migrate to far-fetched areas with intact nature and low level of stress.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that living in a large city brings many advantages. However, the citizens today are dealing with countless problems in their routine life. Therefore, I personally believe that the government should encourage them to migrate to smaller towns by building more facilities to attract them.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-21 | hachi-0903 | 78 | view |
| 2022-08-21 | hachi-0903 | 78 | view |
| 2022-08-21 | hachi-0903 | 78 | view |
| 2022-08-21 | hachi-0903 | 78 | view |
| 2021-08-30 | ACHYUTHANWESH VANGA | 73 | view |
- Living in large cities today poses many problems for people What are these problems Should governments encourage more people to live in smaller towns 89
- Living in large cities today poses many problems for people What are these problems Should governments encourage more people to live in smaller towns 84
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 78
- The diagram below shows how instant noodles are manufactured 78
- The diagram below shows how instant noodles are manufactured 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, look, second, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 41.998997996 157% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2202.0 1615.20841683 136% => OK
No of words: 415.0 315.596192385 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30602409639 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00075376412 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 176.041082164 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587951807229 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 707.4 506.74238477 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 63.9076176504 49.4020404114 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.625 106.682146367 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9375 20.7667163134 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.875 7.06120827912 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280951689508 0.244688304435 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0784084799336 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0612339219003 0.0667982634062 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170062430179 0.151304729494 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0931623187457 0.056905535591 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.52 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 78.4519038076 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 9.78957915832 204% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.