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.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.
In the argument mentioned above, the overdevelopment of the country is the concern of the council of Maple country. Therefore, they want to restrict the development of existing farmland in the country as a proposed measure. To check the argument, two examples with reverse results have been brought from two different countries. Both examples are about the price changes as a result of the fulfilment of such a proposed measure. With a closer look, we can see that the argument and also two examples have some weaknesses and they are not properly formed.
Generally, the restriction of new housing creation will affect house price changes. But the amount of change based on the different factors in the countries is different. In this argument, there is no evidence about these factors, such as economic and geographical conditions in each country. The discussions had been more valid if the practical elements of price changes would have been considered. It is difficult to understand according what factors, opponents and proponents formed their arguments.
According to what figures, the proponents of limiting the supply of new housing have presented such an example from Chestnut County. There are no statistics about this example. They only mentioned that 10 years ago, Chestnut County had run a similar measure and based on the conditions at that time, the price change had been modest. Are the current conditions in Maple country similar to the conditions in Chestnut County 10 years ago? We have to consider that the price change can be an influential factor year to year as the different conditions change. So, the consideration of such an example for the implementation of such a measure is not appropriate. Similarly, the example of opponents has also the weaknesses mentioned above. The situation of 15 years ago cannot be comparable with the current situation in Maple country.
The council of Maple country should consider the current conditions in the country. For example, they should check the number of people that need to have a house. The level of income in the country should be taken into account. They have to consider whether the limitation of house supply has adverse effects on the economic and social situations of the country or not. In other words, the proposed measure should be done based on the existing conditions in the country.
In conclusion, in my view, the arguments of opponents and proponents would have been more acceptable if the proposed measure would have been checked with the current situation of the country considered. Currently, none of them is persuasive enough for making a correct and rational decision.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, similarly, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, in my view, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2228.0 2235.4752809 100% => OK
No of words: 435.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12183908046 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79850100486 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 215.323595506 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.422988505747 0.4932671777 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 690.3 704.065955056 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.9196636463 60.3974514979 51% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 89.12 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4 23.4991977007 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.92 5.21951772744 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 10.2758426966 19% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.83258426966 269% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186719028595 0.243740707755 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0525212843787 0.0831039109588 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.054764043426 0.0758088955206 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0946712786874 0.150359130593 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0449752660067 0.0667264976115 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.12 12.1639044944 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 100.480337079 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.