Some people believe the 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.
The methods of mitigating traffic congestion have been a heated topic of controversy. Some people argue that the construction of larger roads is the answer for the problem. However, I contend that such a solution is ineffective in the long term, while the option to construct railways and subways is a far better measure.
There is a common fallacy that governmental spending on building larger roads could sustainably address the problem of traffic congestion. An increase in road size could reduce the traffic intensity in the short term, but larger roads also mean that the citizens are encouraged to purchase more individual vehicles. This leads to the fact that the roads, albeit larger, would soon be filled with intense traffic again. For instance, traffic jams returned to Shanghai’s main streets not long after they were expanded in the early 1990s. In brief, if this solution is implemented, traffic jams would still persist in the long run.
Rail and subway systems, however, could ensure that traffic congestion is properly addressed. Unlike cars and buses, trains are capable of transporting hundreds of people simultaneously and thus would meet the transport demand of a vast number of passengers. Moreover, trains do not have to go through intersections and traffic lights, and dedicated lines ensure their travel is hardly interrupted. In other words, trains are always on time regardless of the level of traffic. This level of punctuality would encourage many people to choose railways and subways as their primary means of transport, and the number of individuals vehicles would decrease accordingly. As a result, traffic congestion could be tackled successfully.
The existing data provides a concrete foundation to conclude that building more and larger roads in an unsustainable measure, while train and subway lines would be a much more effective solution for the problem of traffic
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-24 | Thang Tran | 78 | view |
| 2020-01-11 | happyhappy | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | MOHETH CHOWDARI | 73 | view |
| 2019-10-31 | Lynn2309 | 67 | view |
| 2019-10-02 | ThuBella | 67 | view |
- Some people think that criminals should be given longer terms in prison, so as to reduce the crime rate.To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
- Many people believe that it is important to protect the environment, but they make no effort to protect it themselves.Why do you think it is the case?What actions do you think that individuals can do to protect the environment? 84
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981, 1991 and 2001. 84
- Some people believe the 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. 61
- Some people believe the 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 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, however, if, moreover, so, still, thus, while, for instance, in brief, as a result, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1616.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 303.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33333333333 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85794479793 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557755775578 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.8952360749 49.4020404114 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.733333333 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.13333333333 7.06120827912 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.26520561438 0.244688304435 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0880207380695 0.084324248473 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0550596354355 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157371337369 0.151304729494 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0357623679805 0.056905535591 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 78.4519038076 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.