tpooo
Governments have a significant influence on our well-being. They can affect our overall progress and standard of living since they create policies that can directly impact our welfare. Therefore, I disagree that It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation because the latter better assist lower income individuals and helps the environments more than the alternatives.
To begin with, public transportations should be of high priority to any government with regard to funding to assist less wealthy members of the society. In fact, students are among the rest of the society who uses public transportations because they are under a great financial burden, but bus and subway services are not always convincing nor comfortable. For instance, in many cities, there are not enough stops or stations to handle the demand, and the ones that exist, are often dirty and overcrowded. Hence, more projects and funds should be used towards public transportation to increase accessibility and replace older vehicles. Although internet services is a necessity nowadays, it does not seem to be a problem accessing internet from anywhere because WIFI is widely spreading everywhere. Therefore, investing in public transportation will benefit the society more to support low income members.
Another reason worth mentioning is that spending more money on public transportation will result in helping our environments. Indeed all these vehicles is harming our medium due to the chemical gases that are spreading from buses and subways. However, rising the number of public transportation will result in less and less people using their own cars to move from one place to another. For example, if public transit were more comfortable with many stops and station that connect all areas of a city, many people will drop the use of their personal car and start to use mass transit. Hence, less greenhouse gases will be released into the atmosphere which will leads to improvement in global warming. Even though improving internet services will improve many aspects, but spending money on public transit will diminish air pollution and therefore less environmental and health problems. This is why improving mass transportation is the optimal approach from an environmental perspective.
For the aforementioned reasons, I adamantly believe that the government should invest more in public transit rather than in internet access. Hopefully, this becomes more prevalent in the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 127, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Indeed,
...ill result in helping our environments. Indeed all these vehicles is harming our mediu...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 320, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... transportation will result in less and less people using their own cars to move fro...
^^^^
Line 7, column 122, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nvest more in public transit rather than in internet access. Hopefully, this be...
^^
Line 7, column 144, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ransit rather than in internet access. Hopefully, this becomes more prevalent i...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, so, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in fact, to begin with, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 43.0788530466 56% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 52.1666666667 88% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2152.0 1977.66487455 109% => OK
No of words: 394.0 407.700716846 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46192893401 4.8611393121 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95669483903 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553299492386 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 668.7 618.680645161 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => 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: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.3273623387 48.9658058833 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.555555556 100.406767564 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8888888889 20.6045352989 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.16666666667 5.45110844103 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.236089414692 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.076458572812 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0737576698707 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.150856017488 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0645574589148 0% => 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: 15.2 11.7677419355 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 58.1214874552 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 10.9000537634 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.01818996416 117% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 86.8835125448 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.