Government should spend money on railways rather than roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
An effective transport system helps improve a nation’s economy. Many believes that public officials should invest more budget on building an effective railway rather than constructing more roads. In my opinion, the former will help us more in the long term.
First, by making more rails we can effectively use trains as our primary mode of transport, which are more effective and much faster. Trains are able to transport more people and much faster than cars or bus. Second, trains can also be use to move products, especially those that are time sensitive like foods and produce, because they are much faster and able to move large amount of materials. Lastly, railways leave less carbon footprint than any other vehicles thus they are more environmentally friendly.
On the other hand, roads are more accessible to various type of vehicles. They can reach and bring people to far more remote places that trains may not be able to access. But, traveling by roads are often slower due to frequent stops and limits set by traffic rules. Although roads are relatively cheaper and faster to build, there are more accidents reported happening on the roads than in railways. Lastly, the impact of carbon emissions released by cars on the roads contributes to the worsening problem of climate change.
In summary, railways are an effective and faster mean of transportation and delivering products. Thus, it is a viable option in finding a solution to the burden brought by too much cars on the road. Politicians should explore the possibility of this system as our primary mode of transport.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 237, Rule ID: BE_USE_TO_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...cars or bus. Second, trains can also be use to move products, especially those that...
^^^
Line 3, column 237, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...cars or bus. Second, trains can also be use to move products, especially those that...
^^^
Line 7, column 177, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...a solution to the burden brought by too much cars on the road. Politicians should ex...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, lastly, may, second, so, thus, in summary, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1343.0 1615.20841683 83% => OK
No of words: 265.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0679245283 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63216676652 2.80592935109 94% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 176.041082164 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.581132075472 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 415.8 506.74238477 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.6164514138 49.4020404114 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.5333333333 106.682146367 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6666666667 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.0729473052415 0.244688304435 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0278540193846 0.084324248473 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436450280565 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0529803968271 0.151304729494 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.031651470561 0.056905535591 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.0946893788 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 12.4159519038 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 78.4519038076 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.