The only way to reduce the amount of traffic in cities today is by reducing the need for people to travel from home for work, education or shopping. To what extent do you agree or disagree ?
The increasing demand for commuting to workplaces, educational institutions or shopping locations of city dwellers is said to be the sole culprit of heavy traffic in urban areas, and thus needs reducing immediately. The following essay will challenge this school of thought as I believe that there are other more effective ways to curb the problem.
Admittedly, residents' travel in cities due to different purposes, whether it is business, education or shopping-related, can indeed be attributable to urban traffic issues. This is probably because these travel are too frequently-made, and people tend to use their personal vehicles when commuting, leading to the large amount of means of transport down the roads, especially in the rush hours. Take, for example, the Vietnamese's current traffic situation. They more often than not face traffic congestions before or after school and working hours owing to people's preference over private means of transport. This, coupled with the unavoidable working and studying travelling scheme, results in extremely horrible traffic issues, even in major cities over the country. Additionally, before special occasions such as Christmas and Halloween in Western countries or Tet in Eastern ones, road-users may increase significantly since people may want to make purchases prior to these festivities. Therefore, it is understandable why the reduction in people's demand for commuting seems needed to tackle such problem.
However, my glance would be that detering people from travelling may not be the only remedy to decrease the quantity of traffic in metropolis. More viable methods will be including improving subpar roads and making people cognizant of public transport's benefits. As for the former method, there are still countless narrow roads and potholes in some streets which can cause gridlocks since drivers would be force to drive significantly more slowly; therefore, upgrading and expanding roads would definitely help to alleviate traffic problems. The government and local authorities can also propagandize about the environmental and economical benefits of public transport by putting this piece of information on social media and TV commercials to promote resident's usage. These two methods can together significantly curb traffic issues, and would even render the previous method unsound.
In conclusion, although decreasing people's need for travel of various reasons may sound justifiable to a certain extent, I would argue that the other aforementioned remedies can outperform the previous one.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-17 | nhanluu79462 | 78 | view |
| 2023-05-14 | hieu13092006 | 56 | view |
| 2023-01-04 | vanphat03 | 80 | view |
| 2022-12-01 | NSMDeadshot0411 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-23 | levanhoan123 | 78 | view |
- The only way to reduce the amount of traffic in cities today is by reducing the need for people to travel from home for work education or shopping To what extent do you agree or disagree 80
- In the past lectures were the traditional method of teaching large numbers of students in a classroom Nowadays new technology is increasingly being used to teach students What are the advantages and disadvantages of this new approach in teaching Give reas 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 558, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'people'.
Suggestion: people
...after school and working hours owing to peoples preference over private means of transp...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 630, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...ropagandize about the environmental and economical benefits of public transport by putting...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, still, therefore, thus, well, as for, for example, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 7.85571142285 216% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2179.0 1615.20841683 135% => OK
No of words: 385.0 315.596192385 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.65974025974 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4296068528 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00816452398 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 176.041082164 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612987012987 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 664.2 506.74238477 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.4543255502 49.4020404114 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.266666667 106.682146367 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6666666667 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.06666666667 7.06120827912 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251278020569 0.244688304435 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0813212577848 0.084324248473 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0585371167928 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153335860527 0.151304729494 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0476978491975 0.056905535591 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.09 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 78.4519038076 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.