In recent years, there have been two opposing views on how to cope with the problem of traffic congestion. Some people suggest that government should appropriate more funds for the construction of railways and metro systems. However, others consider road-widening policies a feasible solution to improving traffic flow. In my opinion, building railroads and subway lines can more effectively reduce traffic jams, as opposed to just widening roads.
On the one hand, widening roads is thought of as an effective strategy to increase the capacity of a traffic corridor by adding lanes for vehicles. Take Seoul city for example. With a rapid increase in its population, existing two-lane roads were inadequate to deal with the explosive growth of vehicles, so local residents were plagued by traffic congestion at rush hour. However, the South Korean government implemented a road-widening policy in which trees were felled to make way for multi-lane roads and huge swathes of forests were cleared for highways. Because of this policy, drivers can commute into the city more smoothly now, reaching their destinations in time without being vexed by traffic problems.
On the other hand, constructing rail and subway networks is a better strategy to reduce the number of commuters and private cars or trucks on roads, which in turn contributes to less traffic congestion. For example, Mumbai was notorious for its chaotic traffic, and driving there would be time-consuming and hazardous. The main roads were jammed with cars crawling bumper to bumper. Nevertheless, this problem was addressed by building a new metro system, which carries more passengers and freight. Due to/Because of this new public transportation, there are now fewer road users and traffic problems.
To recapitulate, people have different perspectives on how to alleviate traffic congestion. Some argue that widening roads is the magic pill to alleviate traffic congestion. However, I am more aligned with the idea of building trains and subways to create a congestion-free place on the grounds that the public transportation that stays away from the busy roads people use every day is credited with improving the traffic flow. Although widening roads allows traffic to flow more smoothly, this argument contains a fatal flaw: wider roads might create an incentive for people to drive, thereby worsening traffic. Hence, it is completely reasonable to spend more tax revenues on this public infrastructure.
- In the modern world it is no longer necessary to use animals as food or other products such as medicines and clothing Do you agree or disagree 84
- Some countries achieve international sports by building specialized facilities to train top athletes instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use Do you think this is positive or negative development 95
- The restoration of old buildings in major cities in the world costs numerous governments' expenditures. This money should be used in new housing and road development. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
- The graph shows the availability of various sweeteners in the USA from 1966 to 2012. 67
- now a days more people are choosing to socialize online rather than face to face it is a positive or a negative development 87
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, nevertheless, so, for example, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2088.0 1615.20841683 129% => OK
No of words: 388.0 315.596192385 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38144329897 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88884761378 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 176.041082164 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577319587629 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 634.5 506.74238477 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.769488511 49.4020404114 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.894736842 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4210526316 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.63157894737 7.06120827912 66% => 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 : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.338449708824 0.244688304435 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103763983653 0.084324248473 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0658596327234 0.0667982634062 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22317739698 0.151304729494 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0902944240809 0.056905535591 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.