Some people think governments should spend money on faster means of public transport. However, others think money should be spent on other priorities (eg cost, environment). Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
It is argued that authorities should invest more in kinds of public transportation. Others, however, think that governments' resources should focus on urgent issues like cost and surroundings. In my perspective, I agree with the first idea and this essay will outline both points of view.
On the one hand, there are some reasons for people who believe that governments should spend cash on other vital aspects is more important. First of all, one of the most pressing concerns is environmental pollution. In society today, residents have tended to own and use private vehicles instead of public moving service. Therefore, with the use of individual transports increasing year by year and exhaust fumes emitted from those vehicles have exerted a detrimental effect on the atmosphere in most large cities. As a result, dwellers are more susceptible to developing respiratory diseases and other types of health problems. In addition, another significant matter is the rising cost of living. For example, inhabitants in Los Angeles had to pay about 3,03 USD for 1-gallon at the beginning of 2016 while people lived in Louisiana only had paid 1,75 USD. That indicates that many citizens struggling to cope with basic daily needs and if such situations do not care, this may lead to a decrease in economic growth and several other problems.
On the other hand, I believe that if authorities pour money into faster public transport projects, which not only brings certain benefits but also contribute to protecting nature and reducing people's cost of living. Firstly, faster forms of transport allow people to reduce their travelling time, so people will have more leisure time and this will increase their work productivity. Secondly, participating in public transportation services also help to restrict demand for the use of personal vehicles and that would limit the amount of emissions released into the surroundings as well as save movement expenses.
In conclusion, with the arguments aforementioned above, I am convinced that improving the speed of public transport is the best way to handle painful social issues.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion, as a result, as well as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1786.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 339.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26843657817 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29091512845 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84744359316 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 176.041082164 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.625368731563 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 549.9 506.74238477 109% => 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: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.1608966781 49.4020404114 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.066666667 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.5333333333 7.06120827912 177% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
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: 0.237244169298 0.244688304435 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0680991499864 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059503067111 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124348873219 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0513533926962 0.056905535591 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => 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: 13.58 12.4159519038 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => 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.