Money should be spent on creating new public buildings such as museums or town halls rather than renovating the existing ones. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Today, there is an ongoing debate on how governments should allocate their budget on whether to create new public buildings or renovate existing ones. Although I recognize that new public buildings have multiple advantages for the community, existing public buildings may have a historical or cultural significance that must be considered.
new public buildings such as museums and town halls offer several benefits to the community. Firstly, they can positively impact the local economy by boosting tourism and creating job opportunities. As landmarks of cultural and historical significance, they can attract visitors from far and wide, generating revenue for local businesses. Secondly, such buildings can enhance the identity and pride of a community by becoming symbols of national heritage. they can serve as a platform for the community to showcase their culture and traditions to the rest of the world, thus strengthening the sense of belonging among its people. Lastly, new public buildings can incorporate the latest technologies and designs, making them more sustainable and efficient in the long run. By using energy-efficient systems and materials, these buildings can help reduce the community's carbon footprint.
On the other hand, the restoration of old buildings can also positively impact the local economy by creating jobs and supporting local businesses. renovation projects often require specialized workers such as architects, engineers, and construction workers, providing employment opportunities for the community. In addition, revitalizing existing public buildings can increase their value and appeal, making them more attractive to tourists and visitors. This can generate revenue for the local economy through increased tourism and cultural activities. Finally, renovating existing buildings can also help maintain a city's character and charm, preserving its unique identity and cultural heritage for future generations to enjoy.
In conclusion, despite acknowledging the benefits of new public buildings to the community, I believe that existing public buildings hold a significant historical or cultural value that cannot be ignored.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-01 | junii | 89 | view |
| 2023-05-14 | ngocngoc02071995 | 73 | view |
| 2023-05-14 | ngocngoc02071995 | 73 | view |
- Money should be spent on creating new public buildings such as museums or town halls rather than renovating the existing ones To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- Money should be spent on creating new public buildings such as museums or town halls rather than renovating the existing ones To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: New
...nificance that must be considered. new public buildings such as museums and to...
^^^
Line 4, column 457, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: They
... becoming symbols of national heritage. they can serve as a platform for the communi...
^^^^
Line 7, column 148, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Renovation
...g jobs and supporting local businesses. renovation projects often require specialized work...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, then, thus, in addition, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 13.1623246493 23% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 10.4138276553 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 41.998997996 67% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1864.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 316.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.89873417722 5.12529762239 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08533105931 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550632911392 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 582.3 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.6126083321 49.4020404114 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.266666667 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0666666667 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.06666666667 7.06120827912 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.67935871743 173% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.225008075276 0.244688304435 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0888377732441 0.084324248473 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0834662875839 0.0667982634062 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167240049782 0.151304729494 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0550337734185 0.056905535591 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.0946893788 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 50.2224549098 66% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.94 12.4159519038 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.02 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 78.4519038076 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.