Some people believe government should spend money on building train and subway lines to reduce traffic congestion. Others think that building more and wider roads is the better way to reduce traffic congestion. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
With the proliferation of contemporary lifestyles comes a wide range of socio-economic dilemmas. For instance, one highly debated issue today is that traffic congestion has brought about various discomfort to individuals. Therefore, in order to tackle it, some believe that the authorities should invest a great amount of money for upgrading overt transportations, while, others think that broandened roads would be a better solution.Personally, I wholeheartedly concur with the former idea. This essay will attempt to present my justifications below.
On the one hand, making refurbishment to the road systems would not be effective . Firstly, in short-term, this could feasibly mitigate the density of the traffic flows, particularly in the rush hours, since larger roads will be given to the drivers.However, the decision-makers later would find it difficult to construct houses, hospitals or parks for denizens as a result of narrowed land areas.
On the other hand, it would be more beneficial when broadening and designing new train and subway lines. The very first advantage is that these are systems not erected directly in the mainstreamed areas but in undeground. By doing this, the governments could make use of the potential underground land and also encourage citizens to approach public means of transport. Secondly, trains and subways have the capacity to travel more quickly and can covey a more colossal quantity of passengers. Consequently, the number of private vehicles might reduce leading to no emissions and that also make a betterment to the living standard.
In conclusion, athough the two solution themselves have merits, I unequivocally believe in spending expenditure on transport systems such as train and subway due to the fact that they are more efficient and advanced than the other types vehicle.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 40, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lifestyles'' or 'lifestyle's'?
Suggestion: lifestyles'; lifestyle's
With the proliferation of contemporary lifestyles comes a wide range of socio-economic di...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 435, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Personally
...ndened roads would be a better solution.Personally, I wholeheartedly concur with the forme...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 81, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... the road systems would not be effective . Firstly, in short-term, this could feas...
^^
Line 3, column 251, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...rger roads will be given to the drivers.However, the decision-makers later would find i...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 271, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... this, the governments could make use of the potential underground land and also ...
^^
Line 7, column 232, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'types'' or 'type's'?
Suggestion: types'; type's
...e efficient and advanced than the other types vehicle.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for instance, in conclusion, in short, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1554.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47183098592 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25574710269 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.658450704225 0.561755894193 117% => OK
syllable_count: 477.0 506.74238477 94% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.7770943851 49.4020404114 155% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.5 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.3333333333 7.06120827912 203% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.01903807615 120% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.182586666484 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0528524427099 0.084324248473 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0439582569094 0.0667982634062 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0970426244258 0.151304729494 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0293094817385 0.056905535591 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.4159519038 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.39 8.58950901804 121% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.