Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is better for government to spend money on building modern housing than on preserving historic or traditional buildings and homes.
Traditional buildings, as we all know, is our wealth. Although it may seem exaggerated, one may find this contention sensible. In this regard, many people support this opinion that the government should spend money on building modern housing than on protecting historic or traditional buildings. Contrary to common belief, I believe that spending money on historical places have not only social effects but also have economic influences on a community. I will delve into two conspicuous reasons to elaborate on my standpoint.
The first reason which makes me hold this belief is the social aspect of preserving an old home. Undoubtedly, constructing new buildings is indispensable and it is considered in most of the urban planning, but historical buildings are the identity of a city and should not be neglected. Specifically, buildings which trace to distant past can be a sign which present people`s way of living. In fact, protecting the signs of the past not only vitalizes the honor of knowing the origination for people of a city but also help them to get more familiar with their previous generations. So, both constructing a new building and conserving old ones should be considered in the government`s expenses.
Another equally noteworthy reason to bear in mind is the economic advantage of maintaining old buildings as a tourism destination. Without a doubt, tourism has a considerable portion of trading, and it is the first revenue resource for many countries all around the world. Therefore, conserving old places by attracting tourists help not only the place more preserve than the past but also attract the money and income for local people. Even inbound tourism would be useful because transfer the money among local businesses leads to rise the payments and also create jobs. Take my experience as an example, several years ago when Turkey had not known as a tourism destination; yet, I had read an article about Turkey, it declaimed that the circumstance of old buildings is not satisfactory and also alluded to this fact that an average wage was low and introduced tourism as an effective cure. Then I travel to Turkey as a tourism expert, and I figure out how tourism helps their old building preserve and how much job it creates.
To summarize, contemplating all remarks, we can safely conclude that preserving old buildings provide social benefits and also economic advantages for residents.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-08-06 | reeya kiran | 76 | view |
| 2020-04-21 | 429602019 | 73 | view |
| 2020-03-28 | pirooz24 | 76 | view |
| 2019-11-16 | Royaaa | 86 | view |
| 2018-07-25 | Meysam-Khan | 91 | view |
- In terms of government expenses, which one is preferable? Is it better to spend money on new buildings or refund the old projects? 83
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?For the successful development of a country, it is more important for a government to spend money on the education of very young children (five to ten years old) than to spend money on universities. 73
- Some people prefer to eat meals at restaurants, while others prefer to prepare and eat food in their own homes. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 83
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Leadership comes naturally one cannot learn to be a leader 73
- Some students prefer to study and do homework alone. Others prefer to study and work on class assignments with a group of fellow students. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 90
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, so, then, therefore, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 15.1003584229 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 43.0788530466 67% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 52.1666666667 77% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2047.0 1977.66487455 104% => OK
No of words: 395.0 407.700716846 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18227848101 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00068250528 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 212.727598566 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554430379747 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 633.6 618.680645161 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.3415426588 48.9658058833 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.411764706 100.406767564 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2352941176 20.6045352989 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.23529411765 5.45110844103 59% => 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 : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.225364136326 0.236089414692 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0709799297316 0.076458572812 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.068462685717 0.0737576698707 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138939213419 0.150856017488 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0398953587375 0.0645574589148 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 11.7677419355 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 10.9000537634 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.01818996416 113% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 86.8835125448 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => 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: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.