It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation
“Public transportation plays a staple role in our daily life.” Tara Westover, Educated, 2018. Which is one important: improving internet access or public transportation? As far as I am concerned, public transportation plays a major role in reducing pollutants, has great impacts globally, and helps people to save both their time and money. In the following, I am inclined to put forth some arguments to support the position.
First and foremost, no prize for guessing that public transportation takes a center stage in reducing air pollution. Indeed, improving public transportation can reduce traffic jams. As a result, it has a great impact on mitigating air pollutions. In fact, according to the SCI, Statistical Center of Iran, private cars have an important role in disseminating air pollutants such as carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, etc. Thus, improving public transportation can reduce the air pollutions effectively.
Another thing coming to the mind is that improving public transportation obstructs the global warming’s side-effects. As an illustrated case, by using public vehicles, the emission of carbon dioxide takes a nosedive and as a result, it stops effectively global warming which puts the flora and faunas’ lives in risk. The fact of the matter is that amending public transportation can provide the opportunity for endangered animals or plants to be recovered. Therefore, this process has a great impact ecologically.
Last but not least, although some people believe that improving internet access is a peremptory action, others prefer to spend on improving public transportation. Because of this fact that the improvement can reduce pollutants as well as traffic congestion, it is beneficiary for people to help them to scrimp and save not only their time but also the money. For example, it helps people to save money pertinent to car’s fuels, taxes, and parking lots. Besides, it benefits them because it reduces various diseases’ outbreak, mentally or physically, which are derived from pollutions and noises. Hence, it seems that governments’ improving public transportation is an imperative and beneficiary approach.
In the nutshell, even though some people prefer amending internet access rather than improving public transportation, others beg to differ. Improving public transportation not only can reduce pollutants, but also it helps people to save their time and money. In addition to, it enables governments to mitigate the side-effects of global warming ecologically. If governments had improved public transportation, nowadays societies would not have encountered with such thorny issues.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-04 | engr.husni | 11 | view |
| 2019-09-12 | hamidreza89 | 89 | view |
| 2019-01-08 | Ehsan Razmara | 56 | view |
- Hail—pieces of ice that form and fall from clouds instead of snow or rain—has always been a problem for farmers in some areas of the United States. Hail pellets can fall with great force and destroy crops in the field. Over the last few decades, a met 80
- Nowadays, children rely too much on the technology. Like computers, smartphone, video games for fun and entertainment; playing simpler toys or playing outside with friends would be better for the children's developments. 76
- There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts especially at a great cost in money and jobs to save endangered animal or plant species 89
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? A person should never make an important decision alone. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 76
- There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts—especially at a great cost in money and jobs—to save endangered animal or plant species.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the st 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 211, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...s, the emission of carbon dioxide takes a nosedive and as a result, it stops effectively g...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 481, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ve encountered with such thorny issues.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, hence, if, so, therefore, thus, well, another thing, for example, in addition, in fact, such as, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2270.0 1615.20841683 141% => OK
No of words: 401.0 315.596192385 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6608478803 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.33231846707 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516209476309 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 698.4 506.74238477 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.10420841683 333% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 16.0721442886 137% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.234889544 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.181818182 106.682146367 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2272727273 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.68181818182 7.06120827912 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 21.0 8.67935871743 242% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.41435303262 0.244688304435 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129670550539 0.084324248473 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109307066126 0.0667982634062 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.239835280268 0.151304729494 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0717513765425 0.056905535591 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.02 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.