It is undoubtedly true that governments should allocate their annual budget in transportation sector for the development of railways rather than roads. I completely agree with this opinion that will be described below.
Train is the most effective transportation in the world for people. This is because train could guarantee the passengers to arrive on time at their destination. This strength could solve the problem of congestion, especially in metropolitan cities in the world where most of their citizen commute daily for working from suburban area towards the central of cities. Based on this evidence, most of the cities council have projected the development of train infrastructures, including railways. For example, the government of Jakarta province has begun the establishment and the improvement of mass rapid transports since on the early of 2010s to reduce the rate of traffic jam. Hopefully, it can help people to reach their destination quickly.
The other reason is train listed as one of the most convenience mode of transportation in comparison with another mode of transportations, such as ships, cars, and motorcycles. This is because all train bureaus have standardized their safety procedures during its operation as well as aircrafts companies. Based on the data from Indonesian Statistical Bureau, on 2017, the rate of accident for trains had the lowest rate compare with other vehicles. Furthermore, train companies have improved their basic service gradually for their customers like ticketing system and reservation that attract people to use this transportation rather than other kind of transportation. Thus, this improvement make trains more comfortable.
In short, I fully agree to expense the annual budget for improving the facilities of railways rather than roads with the reasons explained above.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 402, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'cities'' or 'city's'?
Suggestion: cities'; city's
...es. Based on this evidence, most of the cities council have projected the development ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, so, thus, well, for example, in short, kind of, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1563.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.54255319149 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10940338603 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.578014184397 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.6717307907 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.642857143 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1428571429 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.71428571429 7.06120827912 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0985835947818 0.244688304435 40% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0384298283722 0.084324248473 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0718956556613 0.0667982634062 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105624379619 0.151304729494 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0923217504076 0.056905535591 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.85 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.