The government should impose a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour to help cut down on air pollution from exhaust fumes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Many regions of the world, especially large metropolises, have witnessed a problem regarding huge volumes of traffic. In order to curb this issue, some people have suggested that governments should require all people wishing to use their own vehicles during rush hour to pay a fee, and I agree with this proposal. With the following essay, I will elaborate on the reasons supporting my point of view.
To begin with, a fee upon private vehicle usage during the rush hour will discourage people from driving or riding their own vehicles, easing traffic congestion. Should the fee imposed be higher than the ticket costs for public transportation, citizens of a city will find public transport to be the most ideal option for their daily commute, stemming from its low price. A shining example of a city that has successfully implemented such a scheme is the British capital of London, infamous for its high volume of traffic and air pollution. Since the introduction of a "congestion fee" during rush hour timeframes, there has been a marked rise in the ridership of London's public transport systems. As a result, recent statistics have shown that the amount of fine particles and harmful air pollutants in London's atmosphere has plunged dramatically, creating a better living environment for all Londoners.
On top of that, the additional money collected from such fees can help fund a variety of projects that can vastly improve the life quality of the inhabitants. This money can go towards making busy cities greener. Stockholm, for instance, has utilized the funds from a rush hour regulation to plan more flora throughout the city, markedly improving its air quality. Furthermore, this additional money can aid tremendously in improving pre-existing public transport facilities, such as refurbishing outdated train cars, replacing buses or building bike lanes.
Yet, some detractors claim that this rush hour scheme will discriminate against financially disadvantaged people. To combat this problem, I would like to propose some solutions that are practical for all governments on all levels. First, poorer people can apply for this "rush hour" fee reduced or waived. Secondly, governments can subsidise public transport prices for rush hours.
To sum up, easing traffic congestion and supplemental funds are just two of the various positive results brought about by a rush hour fee. For these reasons, I agree with a proper implementation of a law regulating such rush hour fees.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-02-13 | suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun | 56 | view |
| 2023-02-13 | suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun | 58 | view |
- Every year several languages die out. Some people think that this is not important because life will be easier if there are fewer languages in the world.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 73
- The government should sometimes infringe on people's freedom for the security of society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? 80
- The government should impose a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour to help cut down on air pollution from exhaust fumes To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 90
- The chart shows the percentage of male and female teachers in six different types of educational setting in the UK in 2010. 73
- The graph below gives information about international tourist arrivals in five countries.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 568, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ir pollution. Since the introduction of a 'congestion fee' during rush ...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, for instance, such as, as a result, to begin with, to sum up, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 15.1003584229 40% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 43.0788530466 60% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2127.0 1977.66487455 108% => OK
No of words: 399.0 407.700716846 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33082706767 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93315970548 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 212.727598566 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591478696742 0.524837075471 113% => OK
syllable_count: 640.8 618.680645161 104% => 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: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.3920491272 48.9658058833 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.166666667 100.406767564 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1666666667 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38888888889 5.45110844103 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.257761298671 0.236089414692 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0803582552663 0.076458572812 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0650882220909 0.0737576698707 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146935893473 0.150856017488 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0411445593762 0.0645574589148 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 10.9000537634 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.48 8.01818996416 118% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 86.8835125448 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.