There is an almost universal consensus that the individual should relocate to a metropolis in order to reduce the traffic jam and pollution issues. I completely disagree with this assertion and will give my reasons below.
On the one hand, when people migrate to larger cities, they will not stay long distances in their worksites. As a result, they no longer have to commute to city and rural areas on a daily basis, after which, the number of vehicles such as trucks, car, and motorcycles will be declined. This means that it would be limited traffic congestion and poisonous emission, which is emitted into the atmosphere. However, this plan is impossible to implement because it is impractical.
On top of that, the best way to diminish transportation problems is that the local council should promote businesses to build their production units in smaller countries, and recruit workers there. Consequently, citizens who live in the suburbs are not required to work far from home. For example, the government in India motivates companies in their country to build industry units in the outskirts, leading to the satisfaction of individuals, hence, they work more efficiently and always go to work on time, because they no longer spend time on the road from the countryside to the city. Furthermore, the majority of inhabitants have a tendency to make more money in their local than in any other region. This is simply because they do not allocate their budget to transportation like repair and gasoline costs.
In conclusion, it is supposed that the migration of individuals to larger cities helps to reduce the traffic jams and the bad effects on the atmosphere. In my perspective, it is too hard to implement and the government should launch a different scheme to improve this problem.
- Table The price of a cup of coffee in six cities from 2010 to 2014 in Australia 84
- The diagram below shows the process by which bricks are manufactured for the building industry Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 70
- The graph below shows the number of overseas visitors to three different areas of a European country between 1987 and 2007 73
- The maps below shows the development of a particular area from 1965 to present day 78
- The map shows the changes to a residence hall between 2010 and the present 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, furthermore, hence, however, if, so, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1501.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 298.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03691275168 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86672453239 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587248322148 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 468.9 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.214409803 49.4020404114 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.461538462 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9230769231 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.84615384615 7.06120827912 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.133207572639 0.244688304435 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0419201551509 0.084324248473 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0306431784133 0.0667982634062 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0763488783341 0.151304729494 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0187285003717 0.056905535591 33% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.4159519038 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 78.4519038076 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.