It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation.
It has been long debated about whether the government should spend more money to improve the Internet access than to improve the public transportation. From my perspective, I firmly believe that it is more important for the government to spend more money on the public transportation rather than on Internet access for two significant reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.
To begin with, that the public transportation is extremely useful in our everyday life. Spending the money on improving public transportation will benefit the commuters tremendously without doubt, saving them plenty of time for work and leisure. For example, my hometown was a crowded city filled with a population over ten million people. At that time we did not have subway and the roads were narrow. It is not hard to imagine what kind of traffic jam it would be during the rush hours. My mom would have to take the bus to commute, spending two hours in the morning and two in the evening, which made her exhausted. Things started to change when about five years ago, the city government started to invest in building subway and broadening the roads for the city. Now as more people can take the subway to commute, traffic becomes much better. The city is less crowded and busy. People spend less time commuting, including my mom, who now takes the subway to work and her time spending on commuting was cut down to only half an hour each way!
In addition to being useful to the commuters, it can be clearly seen that the public transportation benefits more people than Internet access. As is vastly acknowledged, not everyone in the society have access to the Internet. For many elders, new technology like Internet is still far away from their life. And the young children who usually only spend a small portion of their time surfing the Internet do not benefit significantly from the improvement of the Internet. However, we cannot deny that both of the young and the old take public transportation frequently. Therefore, spending money public transportation is really a necessity.
Admittedly, spending money on improving the Internet is needed, for nowadays people need better Internet access to work more productively. But the expenses are huge compared to which spent on the public transportation. I do not think that it is worthy to spend so much on things many cannot use. Another thing we need to consider is that most of the Internet services are provided by private companies. It will be difficult for the government to interfere with business. The companies, who need to compete fiercely in order to win customers, are improving and providing better access to the user. Hence, there is no need for the government to spend that much money to improve Internet access.
To sum up, I strongly believe that it is more important for the government to spend more money on the public transportation rather than on Internet access, for the public transportation is more conducive to the general public than the improvement on Internet access.
- It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation 87
- Summarize the lecture being sure to explain how it cast doubt on specific pints in the reading lecture 76
- Agree or disagree The advertisements today are less honest than in the past 82
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t down to only half an hour each way! In addition to being useful to the commu...
^^^
Line 9, column 212, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...transportation is more conducive to the general public than the improvement on Internet access...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, really, so, still, therefore, another thing, for example, in addition, kind of, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 15.1003584229 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 52.1666666667 128% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 8.0752688172 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2539.0 1977.66487455 128% => OK
No of words: 513.0 407.700716846 126% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94931773879 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75914943092 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79325329042 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.438596491228 0.524837075471 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 791.1 618.680645161 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.9029305964 48.9658058833 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.56 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.52 20.6045352989 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.16 5.45110844103 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.639825062068 0.236089414692 271% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.176338845805 0.076458572812 231% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.195419481186 0.0737576698707 265% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.480805236709 0.150856017488 319% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.211813689145 0.0645574589148 328% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 11.7677419355 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 58.1214874552 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 10.9000537634 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.46 8.01818996416 93% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 86.8835125448 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.