Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Recently, the phenomenon of railways expansion around the world and its corresponding impacts have sparked a debate. In this regard, apart from various advantages of roads, some people believe that the federal budgets should be spent on spreading railways. In my view, extra funds to expand railroad networks, eventually leads to positive outcomes in terms of economical purposes and tourism, while we shouldn’t lose sight of roads’ advocates.
Obviously, the use governmental resources to spread railways both domestically and internationally paves the way to the short-term and long-term economical benefits. For instance, by using more trains which are moving on broad railroads goods will be transported remarkably more efficient. With respect to efficiency, fuel consumption per unit of carried goods will dramatically declined and so the fare of transportation will tend to downward. Meanwhile, environmental concerns such as greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation because of making more roads will relieve.
Furthermore, tourism and travel industry can benefit railway expansion which should be developed by governments. As tangible example, through various types of railway coaches, say, subways, trams, and traditional trains far more people can be transported at the same time. It is likely through connecting inter-nations’ railroads, the number of trips to visit foreign countries may experience a considerable climb.
On the other hand, others are of the opinion that governments should pay to make more roads. They highlight several advantages of a wide road network across country, such as the ease of using one’s own vehicle and the opportunity to pull over wherever they want to enjoy landscapes. In addition, studies prove that the share of roads regarding both passengers and goods transportation cannot be overlooked.
To sum up, despite several compelling argument on cons and pros of this matter, I am inclined to believe that the merits of spending money on railway rather than road by governments far outweigh its downsides. Eventually, which one is your preference: waiting in a traffic congestion for hours a day or the pleasure of sitting in high-speed congestion-free trains?
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-03-20 | farhodyusupov | 61 | view |
- Hosting sporting events such as the Olympics and the World Cup can bring benefits to the host countries How far do you agree with this statement Use your own examples to support 69
- The table below gives information about changes in modes of travel in England between 1985 and 2000 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- City population has been growing rapidly To cope with this problem should we rely on city planners or new policies 88
- Journalist is one of the most difficult jobs in the world What do you think 85
- The position of women in society has changed markedly in the last twenty years Many of the problems young people now experience such as juvenile delinquency arise from the fact that many married women now work and are not at home to care for their childre 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 146, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...the way to the short-term and long-term economical benefits. For instance, by using more t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 379, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'decline'
Suggestion: decline
...unit of carried goods will dramatically declined and so the fare of transportation will ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, look, may, regarding, so, while, apart from, for instance, in addition, such as, in my view, to sum up, with respect to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1883.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 337.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.58753709199 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16362783259 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 176.041082164 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.655786350148 0.561755894193 117% => OK
syllable_count: 558.0 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.6583146881 49.4020404114 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.533333333 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4666666667 20.7667163134 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0666666667 7.06120827912 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => 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: 0.158283289064 0.244688304435 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.046629592214 0.084324248473 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0575751438359 0.0667982634062 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0830279747871 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0477638380069 0.056905535591 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.44 12.4159519038 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.74 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 78.4519038076 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.