A/D it is more important for government to spend money on improving internet access than on public transportation.
It is no doubt that government cares about its people and is eager to improve the quality of people’s life. However, whether improving internet access is more important than improving public transportation is a long-standing controversial issue. For me, I agree that spending money on making internet access better is more important, considering government has limited budget, emphasizes the efficiency, and should spend it on programs could benefit most people.
First of all, government has budget concern and building internet access spends less money. For example, government needs only to build a solid concrete house that can protect the machines sending the internet signals and maintain them. Nevertheless, to build public transportations, government has to hire many construction companies and workers and buy different types of trains or cars. Not to mention, those facilities must be maintained very closely so that people could use them safely, and it costs another great deal of money. Obviously, with the budget concern, building internet access is more important for government to do.
Secondly, government puts emphasis on efficiency when spending money and improving the internet access would be more efficient than building public transportation. To illustrate, to build better internet accesses, government only needs to create enough and solid stations that can receive and distribute the Internet signal. Those facilitates could be set up over a night and work well soon after they are activated. However, improving transportation system could take long time and what’s worse, still could not work. For example, deciding where to build or improve the transportation systems takes a while because people everywhere would hope they are the first ones who could have the facilities. Even after the facilities are built, different companies running the train or metro systems spend time to negotiate how to make different systems work together, as we can tell from the experiences from many countries. As a result, building internet access is much more efficient.
Still, some people argue that the internet is not as necessary as transportation systems is. However, considering which project could benefit more people, my point still stands. In other words, improving internet access could benefit most people whereas improving public transportation could not. To be more specific, nowadays everyone has mobile phone or computer. That is, every people could take advantage of the Internet using their devises. On the contrary, public transportation benefits mainly people who don’t drive. Besides, the transportation system cannot reach everywhere in a country. For instance, people living in countryside have no way to use the public transportation. Consequently, government should spend money on making internet access better because it benefits more people.
All in all, I hold the view that improving internet access is more important for government. Not only because it helps government save money, but also because it benefit most people. Besides, it is a more efficient work for government to do.
- o you agree or disagree with the following statement?In the past, young people depended too much on their parents to make decisions for them; today young people are better able to make decisions about their own lives. 70
- Do you agree or disagree: “In today’s world, it is more important to work quickly and risk making mistakes than to work slowly and make sure that everything is correct”? 70
- is it important for older people to learn new things just like young people do 70
- During times of economic crisis, which area of spending do you think the government should reduce: education, healthcare or support for the unemployed? 73
- People are easier to get educated today than in the past. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 163, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'benefits'?
Suggestion: benefits
...ernment save money, but also because it benefit most people. Besides, it is a more effi...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, still, well, whereas, while, as to, for example, for instance, no doubt, as a result, first of all, in other words, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 9.8082437276 194% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 43.0788530466 65% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 52.1666666667 77% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 8.0752688172 297% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2671.0 1977.66487455 135% => OK
No of words: 480.0 407.700716846 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.56458333333 4.8611393121 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95015815843 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.477083333333 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 811.8 618.680645161 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.1075154412 48.9658058833 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.9259259259 100.406767564 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7777777778 20.6045352989 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.18518518519 5.45110844103 150% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 11.8709677419 160% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.509491426395 0.236089414692 216% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151046675271 0.076458572812 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.131487773691 0.0737576698707 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.34571824726 0.150856017488 229% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0754083227777 0.0645574589148 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 11.7677419355 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.67 10.9000537634 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.01818996416 94% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 86.8835125448 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21 Out of 30
---------------------
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.