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?
In today's modern and sophisticated world, the tourist industry plays a vital role in societies' success. In this connection, governments should dedicate money to improve countries to become appealing to foreign visitors. Although contested by many that the matter of repairing old buildings is highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded as both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I concur with the notion that governments should hire police officers to enhance the safety of cities, and I will analyze my reasons throughout this essay.
First, tourists are inclined to visit the places which allow them to spend their time without feeling worries; thus, hiring more police can fulfill their demands. To be more specific, there is a direct correlation between safety in the region and police officers that are hired there. For example, when I went to Paris two years ago, a rubber stole my bag. Therefore, I had a hard time on my entire trips. Although Paris is a beautiful city, I won't go there again because I did not feel safe there; moreover, I felt stressed when I walked in the streets. If the government had increased the number of police, I would not have experienced anxiety, thereby visiting the city in the future, which improves its tourism industry.
Second, old buildings display the culture and history of cities, so governments should strive to preserve their genuine appearance instead of repairing them, which causes changes in their shapes. To elucidate, many historical buildings and streets have specific and innovative architectures, which cannot be repaired again since modern people do not have enough knowledge to know how to renovate them without altering their original structure. According to my own experience, when I was a member of a civil company, we asked to repair the historical bath in Kashan. Although our group contained professional engineers, we could not improve this building without causing damage. The bath had extraordinary features, and it was warm with just one candle; however, renovation destroyed the candle. As a result, this city lost a host of tourists tending to visit the fascinating phenomenon there.
To conclude, while there are several arguments on each side, I profoundly believe that it is a great asset for governments to increase the police to attract tourists instead of repairing old buildings. Not only do visitors prefer to have a trip to safe places, but they also want to visit old buildings with their original materials and structures.
- Some people think that it is an important part of a child s education to go on field trips for example museums other people think a child s time is better spent learning in a classroom at school What is your opinion 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is better for younger people to take risk and explore new things than older people 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement One quality that a successful leader must have is to make decisions quickly when a leader takes too much time to make decisions he will be seen as inefficient to the people he leads 85
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It s the best way for teachers to help students become more interested in a subject by explaining how this subject can help students live better outside the school 76
- Do you agree that it is better to work for business owned by someone else than to work for the business of one s own family 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 43.0788530466 91% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2141.0 1977.66487455 108% => OK
No of words: 412.0 407.700716846 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19660194175 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50530610838 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81439025146 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 212.727598566 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587378640777 0.524837075471 112% => OK
syllable_count: 671.4 618.680645161 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.51792114695 227% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.1043426083 48.9658058833 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.944444444 100.406767564 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8888888889 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61111111111 5.45110844103 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.275281226837 0.236089414692 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0694372626659 0.076458572812 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0544230544297 0.0737576698707 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14976949927 0.150856017488 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0184200386278 0.0645574589148 29% => 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: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.01818996416 117% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 86.8835125448 139% => 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?
---------------------
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: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.