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?
It is the conundrum for the government that where to spend money, building new public facilities such as museum and town halls or to renovate existing ones. As per my view, preserving and maintaining ancient public places is more needful than availing new public building. Two primitive reasons for this are: Renovate existing places is cost-effective solution for many world’s governments, Old places often have it’s own historical values.
To begin with, redeveloping museums and town halls proved to be a cheaper solution than building new public places from scratch, for the developing countries’ government. Once these places renovated properly, they look like a new one and even within allocated budget. For instance, the Brazilian government has renovated all the monuments of the Rio city instead public demand for setting up new recreational facilities, because of steep financial resources. The government contemplated that the actual spending is only 3 percent compared to the plan of creating new public buildings. Additionally, republicans also admiring this step from the government afterward. This example clarifies that why spending on preservation of the existing places is so important, in terms of limited financial options.
Consequently, old places have a strong connection with respective countries culture and history. Many world’s cities are known as heritage cities by it’s ancient buildings. In this way, people’s name and history attached with those places and thus emotions is also the key factor for the government to put more focus on reinventing existing places than creating new ones, even if the government is financially capable to build new places. For example, the Indian government believed in maintaining old building in Delhi as it depicts Indian culture and history of the popular personalities. Many of the city’s monuments named after famous national persons, kings of old time, and politicians. In fact, though, the Indian government is too financially healthy to build new places, the government prefers to renovate old ones.
To deduce, by describing both the points I can say that it is not only necessary for countries’ government to save their financial resources in order to preserve old places but also important for them to preserve historical values and culture of their own country.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-02 | Vibhu Khurana | 56 | view |
| 2019-09-04 | D87eepak | 84 | view |
- Some people think that teachers should be responsible for teaching students to judge what is right and wrong so that they can behave well Other say that teachers should only teach students academic subjects Discuss both the views and give your opinion 79
- The main purpose of public libraries is to provide books and they shouldn’t waste their limited resources and space on providing expensive hi-tech media such as computer software, videos and DVDs. To what extend do you agree or disagree with the statem 73
- Tourism is an ever growing industry.What benefits do you think tourism brings to individuals and society. 73
- Some people are concerned that children spend too much time on computers - playing games, chatting and watching videos. But all this time is actually good preparation for children, who will have to spend many hours working on computers throughout their ed 89
- Public celeberations such as national days festivals etc are held in most countries These are often quite expensive and some people say that governments should spend money on more useful things Do you agree or disagree 92
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 67, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'countries'' or 'country's'?
Suggestion: countries'; country's
...ave a strong connection with respective countries culture and history. Many world's ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, if, look, so, thus, for example, for instance, in fact, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 7.85571142285 13% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2020.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 365.0 315.596192385 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53424657534 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06158223713 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539726027397 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 616.5 506.74238477 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.3279667994 49.4020404114 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.25 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8125 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4375 7.06120827912 91% => 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: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201240499515 0.244688304435 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.081042287926 0.084324248473 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100307427578 0.0667982634062 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135354322544 0.151304729494 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0941426424635 0.056905535591 165% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.0946893788 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.09 12.4159519038 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.1 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => 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.