In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Some would argue that it is imperative to spend great amount of funds on building new railroads for high-speed trains between cities, while others believe that the money should be used for enhancing existing public transport. While spending money on constructing new railways is make it easier to commute between cities, I believe that is better to invest for development of existing public transport as it would be cheaper.
On the one hand, investing huge amount of money in the construction of new railways lines would make it easier to travel from one city to another. This is because new trains and the railroads are well-designed to able to go high-speed and more convenient as it could save time and money. For example, in Turkey, between Istanbul and Ankara it used to take 10 hours, but after a faster train was used the journey became faster by 4 hours. However, I believe that this is not the most convenient way to invest money because it would cost a fortune to building those new railways.
On the other hand, investing the money in the improvement of the current public transport would be more economical. This is because improved rail lines will have fewer technical problems and that result in government would spend less funds to repairing trains. For example, in 2018, the UK government released that they have saved 10 million pounds with only improving current underground trains as It was started to work with less breakdowns. I believe this investment is more preferable because it would help to save more money for both individuals and government.
In conclusion, although using public funds on the improvement of new railroads might make it more effortless to travel between cities, it will cost a lot to building those lines and that is why it is better to spend for improving current transportation because it costs lower.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-20 | MinyiChu | 67 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 67 | view |
| 2023-12-30 | Tường Vân | 73 | view |
- In recent years many small local shops have closed because customers travels to large shopping centers or malls to do their shopping Is this a positive or negative development 56
- Life was better when technology was simpler To what extent do you agree and disagree 61
- In a number of countries some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport Discuss both thes 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 230, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun funds is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...d that result in government would spend less funds to repairing trains. For example,...
^^^^
Line 7, column 428, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun breakdowns is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...d trains as It was started to work with less breakdowns. I believe this investment i...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, so, well, while, for example, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1552.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 313.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95846645367 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68942415328 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 176.041082164 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.456869009585 0.561755894193 81% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 463.5 506.74238477 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => 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: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.677723995 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.090909091 106.682146367 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.4545454545 20.7667163134 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.90909090909 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.338401064946 0.244688304435 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148570340069 0.084324248473 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0937156146926 0.0667982634062 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.224381830449 0.151304729494 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0953588426095 0.056905535591 168% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 50.2224549098 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.3001002004 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.4159519038 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.58950901804 93% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 78.4519038076 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.