Question:
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
In twenty years, there will be fewer cars in use than there are today.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Forecast the future is quite easy. Hard is to be exact about when and who it is going to make it happen. Some executive, that I cannot remember who was, of the technology market teach this once. His explanations about his affirmation was very understandable and useful to answer questions such as sustainable deployment. In the future cars will decrease in number and growth in efficiency. That is obviously. What is anybody’s guess is when the global population will have access to those innovations. Same goes with all the probable changes for the next years.
Urgently, the world needs sustainability and a proper look to the environment. Cities have a chaotic traffic, lot of cars polluting, inefficient constructions and anyone can be a fortune-teller saying that fossil fuel will disappear and we will need to reuse water and take care of our natural resources. They are far away from being wrong, indeed, their notion of the emergency that we need those changes are even late. Tech development, such as this present evolution, can open ways to an amazing structure to our cities, the rural zones also can be reached and incredibly upgraded. Would be wonderful having fewer cars in a close future, people using mass transit that are green built.
However, we need to be realistic between eco daydreams. Our cities wasn’t ready for these advancements but this is just for arguments sakes, because with a lot of effort it is reachable. Citizenship is a deeper issue, mainly the society of underdeveloped countries, which are the major population on Earth. The lack of education, basic health and conditions, which are submerged in a cycle of poverty and corruption, are a huge bound for evolution. Visiting a place like that you can watch how bad we are. Specifically saying, if cars in USA, Canada and the greats from EU already are inefficient, whose are sophisticated, locations like Brazil, India, Argentina lives with the scum of the tech. Cars are from 90’s and there are many neighborhoods with no basic health or food. The key point for this argument is that there are many countries that can’t follow the advancement yet.
Sustainability is possible, and the global population has a lot to learn yet, but we will someday use, in the right way, renewable sources of energy, food and any raw materials. Innovations and creations will come to help reduce our carbon emission rates, our waste of elements. Cars are now a problem to the environment, polluting the air, sound and there has a lot of psychological issues attached to the wide-spread use of cars in towns. As any problem, someday it will be solved, but answering a question about when, my guess is not near. Whereby stated before, it is anybody’s guess.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-25 | deeshrestha | 60 | view |
| 2019-11-24 | ellybah | 10 | view |
| 2019-11-24 | ellybah | 3 | view |
| 2019-10-06 | aliola_214 | 60 | view |
| 2019-07-19 | hanieh-std | 76 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Because the world is changing so quickly, people now are less happy or less satisfied with their lives than people were in the pastUse specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 60
- Do you agree or disagree; all students should be required to take classes outside of their major field of study? 86
- Do you agree or disagree; all students should be required to take classes outside of their major field of study? 90
- Television advertising directed toward young children (aged two to five) should not be allowed.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Teachers should not make their social or political views known to students in the classroom.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, so, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 15.1003584229 232% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 13.8261648746 159% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 43.0788530466 86% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2294.0 1977.66487455 116% => OK
No of words: 461.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97613882863 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63367139033 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94424580156 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 271.0 212.727598566 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587852494577 0.524837075471 112% => OK
syllable_count: 723.6 618.680645161 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.6003584229 126% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.1504302412 48.9658058833 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.2307692308 100.406767564 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7307692308 20.6045352989 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.57692307692 5.45110844103 29% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.182134670705 0.236089414692 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0429205329219 0.076458572812 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0380980565824 0.0737576698707 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106845750843 0.150856017488 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.01556018686 0.0645574589148 24% => 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: 10.9 11.7677419355 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 58.1214874552 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 86.8835125448 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.002688172 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.