Quite a number of people believe that the government should invest in constructing new high-speed railway networks that link other cities together. Others, however, argue that the money should be put towards developing the current public transport systems. This essay will discuss why public transport is indeed significant but why high-speed railway systems are more advantageous.
A number of people agree that financing the construction of railway systems is a waste of time, money and labor for several reasons. First of all, these railway connections would provide no benefit if the existing public transport system is inadequate. For instance, one has no need for a train to another city if he or she cannot take the bus to the local town square. Second of all, many people may have family or jobs located only a few blocks away and therefore do not require a train that will take them a considerable distance. In these circumstances, it would be vital to focus on improving public transport rather than funneling money into railway systems.
However, there are several advantages to investing in new railway lines. Congestion on the road would be significantly reduced as more people would opt to take the train rather than a taxi or a bus. New railway lines would also reduce the time it takes to travel to another city, which conveniences those with businesses or jobs situated out of reachable distance. Furthermore, railway networks provide an environmental advantage; for example, fewer people would take vehicles that depend entirely on petrol, thereby substantially reducing carbon monoxide emissions. These factors alone illustrate how railway systems are superior to public transport.
In conclusion, the argument over funding into railway lines has both its negatives and its positives. This essay discussed why some view public transport more crucial, but why railway systems ultimately provide more benefits. In my opinion, investing in high-speed train systems proves beneficial not only to the population but also to the ecosystem.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in conclusion, first of all, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1739.0 1615.20841683 108% => OK
No of words: 325.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35076923077 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24591054749 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81273519727 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 547.2 506.74238477 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.3971112937 49.4020404114 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.6875 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3125 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.8125 7.06120827912 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.290974502856 0.244688304435 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.098374220669 0.084324248473 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0541530461567 0.0667982634062 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181680194894 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0591844750228 0.056905535591 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.