Some people believe government should spend money on building train and subway lines to reduce traffic congestion. Others think that building more and wider roads is the better way to reduce traffic congestion. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
With the proliferation of contemporary lifestyles comes a wide range of socio-economic dilemmas. Indeed, With the proliferation of contemporary lifestyles comes a wide range of socio-economic dilemmas. Indeed, the question of whether the government should increase expenditure on the transit system, or on high-speed rail remains a source of controversy. Although building streets is beneficial to some extents, I would argue that funding on train and subways lines offers more advantages. whether the government should increase expenditure on the transit system, or on high-speed rail remains a source of controversy. Although building streets is beneficial to some extents, I would argue that funding on train and subways lines offers more advantages.
On the one hand, there are a variety of reasons why the government should construct and widen roads system. Firstly, expanding streets plays a crucial role to the urbanization which could develop the transportation infrastructure in the fringe. One particularly good illustration for this is that the population density could be distributed more properly and releasing the burden of the traffic. Secondly, developing more expressways offers more convenient options for the people. This is because the vehicle owners can circulate easily during the rush hour; therefore, the traffic congestion could be alleviated.
On the other hand, I believe that in spite of numerous benefits of the extensive highways, it is more beneficial to boost expenditure on mass transportations results in more favorable outcomes. The most obvious of which are related to the reducing personal vehicles and congestion issues. With regard to the former, public transportation system has a capacity to travel more quickly with a large number of passengers and the individuals transportation could be reduced respectively. Another advantage of increasing disbursement on transit network in which there could be convenient maneuver due to a plenty of spaces among traffic equipment, therefore, this help drivers to avoid the traffic jams and make them safer than on their departures.
In conclusion, while some individuals say that the government should expand more highways to mitigate the gridlock for the cities, it seems to me that spending aggregate expenditure on train and subway lines is much more reasonable.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-24 | Thang Tran | 78 | view |
| 2020-01-11 | happyhappy | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | MOHETH CHOWDARI | 73 | view |
| 2019-10-31 | Lynn2309 | 67 | view |
| 2019-10-03 | Dao Thu Ha | 73 | view |
- Some people prefer to work for the large company, while others prefer to work for the small company. Discuss both views and give your opinions. 73
- Although more and more people read news on the Internet, newspapers will remain the most important source of news. Do you agree or disagree? 73
- Although more and more people read news on the Internet, newspapers will remain the most important source of news. Do you agree or disagree? 78
- Although more and more people read news on the Internet, newspapers will remain the most important source of news. Do you agree or disagree? 73
- Some people believe government should spend money on building train and subway lines to reduce traffic congestion. Others think that building more and wider roads is the better way to reduce traffic congestion. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 40, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lifestyles'' or 'lifestyle's'?
Suggestion: lifestyles'; lifestyle's
With the proliferation of contemporary lifestyles comes a wide range of socio-economic di...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 145, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lifestyles'' or 'lifestyle's'?
Suggestion: lifestyles'; lifestyle's
... With the proliferation of contemporary lifestyles comes a wide range of socio-economic di...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 211, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
...nge of socio-economic dilemmas. Indeed, the question of whether the government should increase expendit...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 492, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Whether
... subways lines offers more advantages. whether the government should increase expendit...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...subways lines offers more advantages. On the one hand, there are a variety of ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 92, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rous benefits of the extensive highways, it is more beneficial to boost expenditu...
^^
Line 5, column 391, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
... a capacity to travel more quickly with a large number of passengers and the individuals transpor...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 428, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...th a large number of passengers and the individuals transportation could be reduced respect...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e them safer than on their departures. In conclusion, while some individuals sa...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in conclusion, in spite of, with regard to, 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: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2002.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 356.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62359550562 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20921772387 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491573033708 0.561755894193 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 620.1 506.74238477 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7134077411 49.4020404114 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.125 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.25 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.875 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.01903807615 179% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.216119361457 0.244688304435 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0683580097826 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0550287303279 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127777475647 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0257809489092 0.056905535591 45% => 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: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => 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.