There is a debate about public transportation. Many people believe that it is important to spend large sums of money on developing new rapid railway lines within cities. Others, however, believe that public funding should be used to improve the existing mass transportation system. This essay will explore both views and provide an opinion in conclusion.
On one hand, it is essential to allocate significant public funds to develop new rapid railway lines, as many cities around the world are not well-connected. Inefficient and ineffective transport systems force city dwellers to use their vehicles to commute, which leads to an increase in traffic congestion and accidents. Therefore, a well-established, fast transport system that connects all areas of the city is necessary to address public transportation issues.
On the other hand, opponents of this idea argue that the money should be used to improve the current mass transportation system. They believe that what is required is not a new rapid railway system, but a more modern city transportation system. Governments can improve transportation facilities by adding new buses or routes that cover all areas of the city. This way, the government can provide a better transportation system without having to spend a great deal of public funding.
In conclusion, while improving the current public transportation system may seem attractive and may be cheaper than building a rapid transportation system, I firmly believe that using the money to develop rapid railway lines is a well-spent investment. It not only links all areas of the city, but it is also a viable solution to current city transportation problems.
- The table below gives information about bakery s average sales in three different branches in 2015 67
- Some people believe that it is a good idea that older people continue to work if it is possible for them to do Do you agree or disagree 78
- The table below gives information about the daily cost of water per person in five different countries Figures are based on the minimum daily requirement per peron of 11 5 litres 73
- The charts below give information about USA marriage and divorce rates between 1970 and 2000 and the marital of adults Americans in two of the years 90
- Some children spend hours every day on their smartphones Why is this the case Is it a positive or negative trend 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 41.998997996 69% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1418.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 265.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35094339623 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14567178501 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 176.041082164 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.543396226415 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 436.5 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
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: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.768851213 49.4020404114 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.076923077 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3846153846 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.84615384615 7.06120827912 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.316726599096 0.244688304435 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119981471553 0.084324248473 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0792646591911 0.0667982634062 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215051576934 0.151304729494 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0772841379709 0.056905535591 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 78.4519038076 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.