Topic: Some people think it is more important to spend money on roads and motorways than on public transport systems.
To what extend do you agree?
During the era of urbanization, improving transport infrastructure has always been major concern for city planners. Some argue that it is essential to allocate money to expand more roads and motorways while others support the idea of upgrading public transportation. From a personal standpoint, both approaches deserve the government’s attention and should be equally invested.
Undoubtedly, the expansion of roads and motorways, especially in metropolises, is an approach to traffic problems. In developing countries, typically Vietnam, traffic congestion has become more worrying than ever before due to the introduction of more cars and motorbikes. Therefore, improving the traffic system is considered one of the most effective solutions to accommodate the increasing number of private vehicles. Additionally, in rural areas where motor vehicles and personal transport are people's main modes, constructing new roads is essential as it facilitates individual mobility and transporting goods while decreasing travel time. This hopefully boosts the local economy and hence improves their income. Also, improved road infrastructure is an optimal approach to guarantee better access to remote areas, especially in an emergency, meaning that public safety is ensured.
Nevertheless, overreliance on personal means of transport may lead to work delays which results from traffic congestion in big cities. This traveling habit even worsens pollution owing to the emission of greenhouse gases into the environment, significantly contributing to global warming and reducing the population of wildlife such as whales, turtles, and many bird species. Moreover, the erection and maintenance of extensive roads may cost the government a fortune which should be allocated to improving alternative traffic systems. Concerning the environment and financial resources, developing public transportation is of great importance. In fact, trains and buses appear to produce far less pollutants than automobiles and motorbikes. More importantly, using public transport happens to be more feasible for low-income residents as the tickets are much more affordable compared to fuel costs.
All things considered, while the convenience of road commuters is undeniable in some respects, the public transport system should be taken into consideration when it comes to urban planning since the possibility of solving pollution, congestion, and financial difficulties in some parts of the world.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-18 | Huyenlbg87 | 89 | view |
| 2023-02-01 | tieuquynh | 89 | view |
| 2022-12-07 | thanhtu000 | 78 | view |
| 2022-09-10 | Charles Le | 78 | view |
| 2022-05-14 | paulha1107 | 73 | view |
- Video records are a better way to learn about the way other people in the world live rather than written documents To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Happiness if often considered difficult to define Why is this What factors determine happiness 87
- Some people think that buildings such as flats and houses should be designed to last a long time Others believe that it is more important to provide accommodation quickly and cheaply Discuss both views and give your own opinion 92
- The chart and table below show customer satisfaction levels in the US with airlines and aspects of air travel in 1999 2000 and 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 44
- The table shows the international tourist arrivals in the top eight countries in 2009 and 2010 and the changes in percentage Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ficulties in some parts of the world.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, therefore, while, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 24.0651302605 33% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2127.0 1615.20841683 132% => OK
No of words: 358.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.94134078212 5.12529762239 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23647080902 2.80592935109 115% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.628491620112 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 661.5 506.74238477 131% => 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: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.6000220848 49.4020404114 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.9375 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.375 20.7667163134 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5625 7.06120827912 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.220315634656 0.244688304435 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627953037032 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0569429603786 0.0667982634062 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13338377591 0.151304729494 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0100646873738 0.056905535591 18% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.0946893788 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.47 12.4159519038 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.77 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 78.4519038076 175% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.