Q : In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe that the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
Recently, the question of how to spend public money has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that improving current public transport systems should take precedence over building new, faster railway lines for bullet trains, while others argue otherwise. And I wholeheartedly agree with the former stand. In the following essay, both views will be discussed before a conclusion is reached with my opinion.
On the one hand, those who claim that the government should allocate public funds to establishing bullet train lines do so for several reasons. Proponents of this argument insist that the advent of these lines could facilitate the nationwide transport of goods and passengers. To be more specific, not only can people with relatives in other parts of the country meet each other with greater ease, but parcels can also be delivered quickly. Furthermore, the introduction of bullet train lines can lead to a boom in domestic tourism, invigorates economic growth in regional areas and as a result, local residents are able to have an improved standard of living.
My opinion, however, is that more emphasis should be placed on upgrading existing public transport systems than erecting railway lines for bullet trains. Perhaps the most compelling reason is that local public transport plays an important role in people's daily life considering that a multitude of citizens make use of it on a regular basis in order to commute to and from work. In addition, an astronomical sum of money is required to set up bullet train lines and facilities, which imposes a heavy burden on the masses because they have to be charged a huge amount of tax money for new public transport systems. As an illustration, one recent study conducted by the government of China has demonstrated that the amount of tax money dedicated to setting up new bullet train lines is predicted three times higher than updating current transport systems. In light of the above, I find these more persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that ameliorating existing public transport should be prioritised for the reasons discussed above.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-20 | MinyiChu | 67 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 67 | view |
| 2023-12-30 | Tường Vân | 73 | view |
- Q4 Many people believe that social networking sites have a huge negative impact on both individuals and society To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- Some people think living in big cities is bad for people s health To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- Some people believe that young people who commit serious crimes should be punished in the same way as adults Discuss both views and give your own opinion 89
- Q20 The family has a great influence on children s development but the influence from outside the home plays a bigger part in children s life Do you agree or disagree 84
- Q5 It is not necessary for people to travel to other places to learn about the culture We can learn as much as from books films and the Internet To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that ameliora...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, so, while, in addition, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1904.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 370.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14594594595 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73378879373 2.80592935109 97% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 176.041082164 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575675675676 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 598.5 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.8613503463 49.4020404114 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.933333333 106.682146367 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6666666667 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 7.06120827912 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.333062765567 0.244688304435 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0975032235674 0.084324248473 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.074861505242 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19444619409 0.151304729494 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528930625094 0.056905535591 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.