In order to attract more tourists, the government could either improve safety by hiring more police or improve its appearance by repairing old buildings and streets. Which way do you think is more effective?
Tourism is one of the most important factors in the growth of a country in many aspects, thus this question comes in mind that what mostly determines the choice of the tourist destination. With this in mind, governments of the countries may try to improve safety by hiring more polices or desirability and appeal of old sites in order to lead tourism into their own destination. From my perspective, the first idea is better due to two main reasons which will be demonstrated in the following essay.
First and for most, most of the international visitors choose their destination based on ancient sites with natural beauties. To put in simple, old buildings, monuments, sites, museums, and art galleries are the most important targets for tourists because mostly they want to learn something profound about the historical and cultural heritage of that country; the more sightseeing is uncombined with modernity, the more invaluable information the tourists can gain. Thus, repairing old sites will not only make it artificial but also lower national audiences' interest toward it. My own experience is a compelling example of this explanation. Two years ago we had some guests from Germany, who used to travel various countries, at first we thought it would be better to invite them into luxury hotels and show modern-based galleries, but the shocking thing was that they refuted it and told us they love to stay at our clay house. For about two weeks, they visited ancient houses and streets which were very old, and they used to discuss the history behind those historic buildings. At last, they were grateful that they could gather invaluable information and took some genuine samples of sites.
Second, security is a decisive criterion for choosing a destination for international tourists. In other words, tourist industries are trying to make their tourist sites free from danger because when visitors want to choose between alternatives, their first priority is somewhere more secure; for their pockets and also political issues between countries, they are more vulnerable to attacks. To illustrate, reading about tourism attraction factors, I found an interesting survey--called CNN survey carried out in 2012-- about the relation between Global Tourism, whether on leisure or business aspects, and various criteria visitors consider when choosing their destination. The company had surveyed about three thousand respondents from more than 70 countries worldwide and asked them about decision-making factors. Then, two-thirds of global respondents had reported safety and security prior to other elements. Some of the survey participants had commented that "sadly, we do not feel safe traveling to places of interest, such as Iran, Egypt, and Russia". Moreover, another research has pointed out that Portugal is an effective safe country with low crimes and no terrorist attacks so far, which has contributed to the growth of tourist flow in recent years. Thus, governments can tackle this problem down by providing more military.
To sum up, in contrast to some beliefs, original ancient sites draw crowds of tourists and there is no need to fix them. On the other hands, the presence of many international visitors presupposes the safeness of a specific country, and estates by funding on the army for defense would prepare the condition suitable for them.
- Some people believe that the internet has brought people closer together by making the world smaller Others disagree claiming that the internet has made people and communities more isolated because they no longer need to leave home and interact with other 90
- Some people say History is one of the most important school subjects. Other people thinks that, in today's world, subjects like Science and Technology are more important than History. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? For success in a future job, the ability to relate well to people is more important that studying hard in school. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
- Are government doing good in educating people to pay attention to the importance of the food nutrition and healthy eating 73
- Are government doing good in educating people to pay attention to the importance of the food nutrition and healthy eating 93
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e demonstrated in the following essay. First and for most, most of the internat...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nd took some genuine samples of sites. Second, security is a decisive criterion...
^^^
Line 3, column 918, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...y and security prior to other elements. Some of the survey participants had commented that ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oblem down by providing more military. To sum up, in contrast to some beliefs, ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, moreover, second, so, then, third, thus, in contrast, such as, in contrast to, in other words, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 43.0788530466 95% => OK
Preposition: 81.0 52.1666666667 155% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2844.0 1977.66487455 144% => OK
No of words: 538.0 407.700716846 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28624535316 4.8611393121 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81610080973 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82131398576 2.67179642975 106% => OK
Unique words: 301.0 212.727598566 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559479553903 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 861.3 618.680645161 139% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 77.7650949977 48.9658058833 159% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.2 100.406767564 142% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.9 20.6045352989 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 5.45110844103 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 11.8709677419 126% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155086615258 0.236089414692 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0451671846741 0.076458572812 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0603693596702 0.0737576698707 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0866313321011 0.150856017488 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0561542502835 0.0645574589148 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 11.7677419355 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 58.1214874552 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 10.9000537634 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 145.0 86.8835125448 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.