As cities expanding, some people claim governments should look forward creating better networks of public transportation available for everyone rather than building more roads for vehicle owning population. What’s your opinion? Give some examples or experience to support.
The idea that governments should look forward to creating better networks of public transportation available for everyone rather than building more roads for vehicle owning population, which lies among arguable debates, has again sparked controversy. Some proponents maintain that government should focus on public transportation, while opponents claim that giving priority to facilitate roads for privately owned vehicles. This essay will put both sides of the continuous issues under scrutiny, hence arrive at a final conclusion.
To begin with, there are a myriad of reasons why focusing on public transportation is important. Firstly, public transportation will help cities and countries to reduce the amount of traffic during the working hours, thus reduce unnecessary congestion. Secondly, it is more environmentally friendly as the energy consumption is drastically reduced. Furthermore, people can cut down on travelling budget by using public transport rather than using their own vehicles.
Moving on to consider the opposing arguments put forward by critics, some people believe that government should pay more attention to improving roads for privately owned vehicles. It is largely attributed to the fact that it gives people more freedom in the choice of travel. For example, a bus user must wait at the bus stop and also may have to transfer a few times, in different routes to get to his destination while a private vehicle owner can go straight to the same place in a shorter time. Furthermore, since both types of transports can share parts of the road network, improving roads can also so improve public transport’s efficiency.
In summary, despite both sides having valid and logical arguments, a final conclusion must be drawn, and I am deeply convinced that government should focus on improving public transportation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-12 | Yuli | 77 | view |
| 2023-01-12 | Yuli | 77 | view |
| 2022-11-04 | fereshteh.r | 85 | view |
| 2022-11-04 | fereshteh.r | 55 | view |
| 2022-11-04 | fereshteh.r | 88 | view |
- There are more men or women in certain jobs and there s nothing we can change about it Do you agree with that 77
- Advance in artificial intelligence has developed quickly Computers can translate very confidently To what extent do you think studying a foreign language is unnecessary 55
- Some people believe that all cities and towns should have at least one large public open space To what extent do you agree or disagree 77
- Advance in artificial intelligence has developed quickly Computers can translate very confidently To what extent do you think studying a foreign language is unnecessary 89
- As cities expanding some people claim governments should look forward creating better networks of public transportation available for everyone rather than building more roads for vehicle owning population What s your opinion Give some examples or experien 77
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 28, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'myriads'?
Suggestion: myriads
...clusion. To begin with, there are a myriad of reasons why focusing on public trans...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for example, in summary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.5418719212 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 6.10837438424 213% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 5.94088669951 118% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 20.9802955665 62% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.75862068966 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1568.0 1207.87684729 130% => OK
No of words: 285.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50175438596 5.00649968141 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01842908272 2.71678728327 111% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 139.433497537 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.624561403509 0.580463131201 108% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 379.143842365 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.9301595565 50.4703680194 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.666666667 104.977214359 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 20.9669160288 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.25 7.25397266985 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.405841669199 0.242375264174 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131932243941 0.0925447433944 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130055413788 0.071462118173 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221377212667 0.151781067708 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.148889565158 0.0609392437508 244% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 12.6369458128 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.1260098522 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.9458128079 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.92 11.5310837438 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.32886699507 113% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 55.0591133005 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.94827586207 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.