In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
It's argued by some individuals, in many countries, that it's important to spend excessive amounts of monetary funds for developing and maintaining new railway tracks that operate high speed trains between cities. On the other hand, some claim it's better to spend money on refurbishing the already present public transport infrastructure. In my opinion, fast trains will be helpful only if the existing transport system works adequately, so money should be spent wisely.
The public transit system can be termed the veins of a metropolitan because they are responsible for keeping the citizens and goods moving. Therefore, good trains and punctual buses are fundamental to the progress of a nation. They don't only boost trade and financial development but also help bring people of two cities close together. A great example of this is the opening of Islamabad-Rawalpindi Metro, that brought much needed prosperity and convenience to the twin cities. In simple terms, a good public transportation mechanism is very beneficial and worthy of investment.
As far as the high speed rail-network is concerned, it's more of a cherry on top rather than the pudding itself. A city should contemplate about investing in this venture only if it already has an efficient public transport. Otherwise, the problems won't get solved and it may prove to be a burden and humiliation. This is evident by the notorious Orange-Line Metro in Lahore, which is a modern high speed railway project in a city that has a poorly functioning public transport. To put it simply, a government should spend money on new ventures only when they achieve a good public transportation system.
In conclusion, both types of transportation have their own advantages. But fixing the basic transport system should be the top priority and fancy trains the second.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-20 | MinyiChu | 67 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 67 | view |
| 2023-12-30 | Tường Vân | 73 | view |
- The charts below show the average percentages in typical meals of three types of nutrients, all of which may be unhealthy if eaten too much.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons were relevant. 78
- Some people believe that nowadays we have too many choices.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
- The charts below shows how frequently people in the USA ate in fast food restaurants between 2003 and 2013.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 56
- Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled They say that the only way to increase recycling is for government to make it a legal requirement To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste 95
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of Australian men and women in different age groups who did regular physical activity in 2010.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 233, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ental to the progress of a nation. They dont only boost trade and financial developm...
^^^^
Line 5, column 194, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[5]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'efficient public transport'.
Suggestion: efficient public transport
... in this venture only if it already has an efficient public transport. Otherwise, the problems wont get solve...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, second, so, therefore, in conclusion, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1532.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 295.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19322033898 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05552560349 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589830508475 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.9336607712 49.4020404114 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.133333333 106.682146367 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6666666667 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06120827912 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.317555573971 0.244688304435 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0928254854373 0.084324248473 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0696313923543 0.0667982634062 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182606985782 0.151304729494 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0972036273194 0.056905535591 171% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.0946893788 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.