The population of many cities is growing rapidly. What are the effects on people living in these cities? What can be done to maintain the quality of life of these people?
Overpopulation has been widely observed in urban areas. This essay will highlight several impacts of this pervading problem on city dwellers, and recommend a number of feasible approaches to stabilise their life quality.
To begin with, when cities become densely-populated, two repercussions stand out as their common negative influences on residents. Chief among those is traffic congestion, in which vehicles frequently grind to a halt during peaked hours. In fact, obviously, the more citizens flock into major cities, the denser the traffic flow will be due to an amplifying number of private transports, just as regions like Jakarta or Bangkok are suffering, as revealed by statistics. In addition, it is proven that no sooner had a region swarmed with people than such lifted population density posed more threats to public health. Specifically, since they are residing in a limited space, avoiding close contact with a patient once they contract a contagious disease becomes more challenging, so the outbreak of an epidemic is imminent, which may cripple the medical system.
However, possible measures can be proposed to support city dwellers in enhancing their wellbeing. Firstly, as traffic conditions are on the bane, the government should allocate resources to upgrade and expand the public transportation system. Indeed, as long as this policy is adopted, rush-hour traffic jams can be mitigated, for the ubiquity of buses, undergrounds or trams may dispense with the use of private vehicles and, therefore, ease traffic flow. Furthermore, another noteworthy point lies in how the authority caters to the physical states of residents, in which massive investment in vaccination and enhancing hygiene standards are highly recommended. Particularly, not only do these strategies establish community immunity against dangerous pandemics, but they also eradicate pathogens by depriving them of the optimal environment for proliferation.
In conclusion, while the rapid population growth in urban regions result in various pressing issues, only by substantive efforts from policy makers can people’s living standard be on par with it previously was.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-25 | phuong cao | 89 | view |
| 2023-10-09 | hinhin411 | 84 | view |
| 2023-03-28 | thaoduong1902 | 78 | view |
| 2023-03-28 | thaoduong1902 | 56 | view |
| 2023-01-14 | hi.nguyn91 | 78 | view |
- Many people think studying in university is a waste of time and money. They are supposed that young people should work for real experience. Do you agree or disagree? 84
- Some people think that it is good for a country’s culture to import foreign movies and TV programmes. Others think that it is better to produce these locally. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 89
- As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think the government should pay for this. Others, however, think that the user should cover the costs. Discuss and give your opinion. 89
- The charts below show changes in the proportion of the energy produced from different resources in a country in 1985 and 2003.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- The diagram below shows the water cycle which is the continuous movement of water on above and below the surface of the Earth You should spend about 20 minutes on this task Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make co 36
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1847.0 1615.20841683 114% => OK
No of words: 327.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.64831804281 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04327597794 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.691131498471 0.561755894193 123% => OK
syllable_count: 572.4 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => 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: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.4395027173 49.4020404114 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.076923077 106.682146367 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1538461538 20.7667163134 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.4615384615 7.06120827912 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.145610140083 0.244688304435 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0433887721833 0.084324248473 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0479483292441 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.087616322371 0.151304729494 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0386727612132 0.056905535591 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 13.0946893788 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 50.2224549098 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.11 8.58950901804 129% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 78.4519038076 164% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => 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.