Downtown Zurzi is becoming increasingly congested with traffic increasing commuting time for those who work downtown or near downtown The nearby city of Loft was faced with the same problem several years ago and implemented a small weekly tax for driving

Essay topics:

Downtown Zurzi is becoming increasingly congested with traffic, increasing commuting time for those
who work downtown or near downtown. The nearby city of Loft was faced with the same problem several
years ago and implemented a small weekly tax for driving one’s car downtown. Downtown traffic almost
immediately subsided in Loft and the local government also raised much needed money for fixing roads
elsewhere. Obviously, this plan should be implemented in Zurzi in order to solve the brewing traffic
congestion problem.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and
explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

The given argument states that traffic in Zurzi is increasing and can be resolved by implementing a system which was used in nearby city Loft for solving the traffic problem. The argument can be evaluated only if some evidences can be provided.

First evidence which is of utmost importance is that were the morale of people of Loft high after the government implementing weekly taxes. If not, this system should not be implemented in any further cities as this could cause chaos and rebellious behavior in the community. Secondly, the geographical location of both cities plays an important role. If Zurzi is a hub for of various commercial companies providing jobs to many people, implementing weekly taxes would not help to reduce the traffic congestion.

Moreover, evidence such as presence of sufficient public transport at Loft would be a factor. If Loft did not have more public transport services or options then implementing weekly taxes could help reducing congestion. Whereas in city Zurzi encouraging people to use more and more public transport would help in reducing the congestion. Also, data such as population density of both the cities would an evidence to evaluate the argument. Two cities having uneven population density cannot be compared for traffic.

Hence if these evidences would have been provided, evaluating the argument will become easier.

Votes
Average: 2.7 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2021-12-05 Nurika 77 view
2020-08-07 Sourabhpardeshi 45 view
2020-08-07 Sourabhpardeshi 27 view
2019-07-15 empyreal092 82 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user Sourabhpardeshi :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 201, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to reduce' or 'reduce'.
Suggestion: to reduce; reduce
...en implementing weekly taxes could help reducing congestion. Whereas in city Zurzi enco...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ity cannot be compared for traffic. Hence if these evidences would have been prov...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 26, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had been'?
Suggestion: had been
...r traffic. Hence if these evidences would have been provided, evaluating the argument will ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, whereas, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 5.0 28.8173652695 17% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 55.5748502994 36% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1159.0 2260.96107784 51% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 220.0 441.139720559 50% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26818181818 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 4.56307096286 84% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76418580065 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 204.123752495 60% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.554545454545 0.468620217663 118% => OK
syllable_count: 365.4 705.55239521 52% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.8010628215 57.8364921388 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 96.5833333333 119.503703932 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3333333333 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172364042682 0.218282227539 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0678904295414 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0700090630749 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103611546516 0.128457276422 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0539362188531 0.0628817314937 86% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 98.500998004 59% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.

Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.

flaws:
No. of Words: 220 350
Minimum 250 words wanted

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 220 350
No. of Characters: 1129 1500
No. of Different Words: 118 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.851 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.132 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.693 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 88 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 61 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 29 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.907 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.833 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.364 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.596 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.084 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5