The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting the supply of new housing, could lead to significant increases in the price of housing in the county. Proponents of the measure note that Chestnut County established a similar measure ten years ago, and its housing prices have increased only modestly since. However, opponents of the measure note that Pine County adopted restrictions on the development of new residential housing fifteen years ago, and its housing prices have since more than doubled. The council currently predicts that the proposed measure, if passed, will result in a significant increase in housing prices in Maple County.
The argument is based on an assessment of a proposal by the council of Maple County about preventing the development of existing farmland in the county. The council predicts that the proposal might increase the price of the houses due to this restriction. The author cites evidences such as the outcome of similar measures taken by Chestnut county and Pine County to support the argument. However, as it stands now the prediction of the council is based on three unwarranted assumptions that diminish the credibility of the proposal.
In the first place, the council has considered the reference of Chestnut County who took similar measure ten years ago and no significant effect on the prices of the housing was observed there. Comparing Maple County and Chestnut County on the same ground is based on the assumption that both of the counties have similar population growth, development, facilities, farmland etc. For instance, Chestnut County might be an underdeveloped area where the price of the houses remained stable. It is less likely to keep the housing prices same in a ten year period if the growth of an area is positive. In addition, the population in Chestnut County might be a lot less than Maple County. That’s why, restriction of housing might have less effect on its price. If any of the evidences prove to be true, the prediction of the council will be disproved.
Secondly, the opponents of the proposal cited that Pine County faced consequences due to the restriction of residential housing which resulted in doubling the price. The opponents are citing their view based on the assumption that the inflation rate remained stable in the fifteen years in Pine County. As we know, from time to time, cost of things go high because of increased inflation and housing is not excluded from that. So its is completely normal that the averages prices of everything will increase. On the other hand, population growth rate in Pine county might be small compared to other areas which is why increased members of the society faced scarcity of housing. If any of the scenarios turn out to be true, the council’s prediction will be weakened.
Finally, the council of Maple County cites the consequence of the restrictive measure similar to Pine County without citing any reasoning.The council didn’t provide any logical similarities in the situation of the two areas. On the other hand, the council didn’t specify the need of the farmland in the Maple County. It might be less dependent of farming and more dependent on infrastructural development. In that case, the restriction can be a hindrance to the development rather than helping it.
Hence, the council’s prediction is based on some assumptions and they have failed to provide any concrete evidence to establish that. The council of Maple County should have analyzed the current population growth, development rate, farmland requirements etc first and then compare the situation with the other two counties based on these. In addition, other detailed information and data analysis need to done to come to a reasonable prediction.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-14 | Anish Sapkota | 66 | view |
| 2023-01-02 | leonor | 68 | view |
| 2022-12-19 | Junu93 | 52 | view |
| 2022-10-21 | zanzendegi | 78 | view |
| 2022-10-07 | nafisasadafprova | 74 | view |
- The council of Maple County concerned about the county s becoming overdeveloped is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county But the council is also concerned that such a restriction by limiting the 74
- The intellectual benefits of attending a university or college are vastly overrated most people could learn more by studying and reading on their own for four years than by pursuing a university or college degree 70
- Society does not place enough emphasis on the intellect that is on reasoning and other cognitive skills 58
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 514 350
No. of Characters: 2533 1500
No. of Different Words: 208 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.761 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.928 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.741 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 186 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 105 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 62 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.348 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.014 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.739 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.342 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.473 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 257, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... of the houses due to this restriction. The author cites evidences such as the outc...
^^^
Line 3, column 848, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ction of the council will be disproved. Secondly, the opponents of the proposal ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 139, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...ine County without citing any reasoning.The council didn’t provide any logical simi...
^^^
Line 6, column 499, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the development rather than helping it. Hence, the council’s prediction is based...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 406, Rule ID: PRP_PAST_PART[5]
Message: Did you mean 'do'?
Suggestion: do
...d information and data analysis need to done to come to a reasonable prediction.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, for instance, in addition, such as, in the first place, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 55.5748502994 139% => OK
Nominalization: 34.0 16.3942115768 207% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2608.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 511.0 441.139720559 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10371819961 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75450408675 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8314016153 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.426614481409 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 811.8 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.3329847427 57.8364921388 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.666666667 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2916666667 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.70833333333 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.31622717588 0.218282227539 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0991176316758 0.0743258471296 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101614136455 0.0701772020484 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.214634139799 0.128457276422 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0890054293339 0.0628817314937 142% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.