Today, the quality of life in large cities is decreasing. Discuss the causes and solutions.
The global phenomenon of urbanisation from the beginning of industrialisation to the present day has brought opportunity and prosperity, albeit at a cost in the quality of life. With an increasing city population, the complexity of the challenges also increases. The causes and solutions for this are outlined below.
The causes for the decrease in the quality of life are paradoxically the prosperity endowed on such metropolitan centres. Their growth is largely due to the increase of opportunities on offer, which in turn increases their attractiveness; essentially they are trapped in a positive self-reinforcing cycle. However, this eventually leads to a decrease in the quality of life as the city can experience overcrowding, exorbitant property prices, and increased vulnerability to terrorist attacks. For example, the density of London makes it a more efficient place to attack, when compared to a smaller city, such as Bradford. Therefore, due to continuous growth and prosperity, urban citizens, especially the less well off, often experience a lower standard of living.
Considering the solutions, greater investment in public transport would ease traffic congestion, as would bike lanes. In theory this would reduce air pollution and possibly improve the wellbeing of the population if they did adopt a more active lifestyle and cycle to work. To counter violent terrorist attacks, cities could embark on CCTV installations, so as to closely monitor for threats. For example, it is said, the CCTV in London has foiled many potential attacks, and therefore greatly increased the security of its citizens.
To conclude, a wealthy city attracts large population inflows, which then cause pressure on existing infrastructure and security. Various solutions exist to mitigate such drawbacks, but nevertheless a definite solution has yet to be found.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-08-08 | Brarharman | 11 | view |
| 2018-08-08 | Brarharman | 56 | view |
| 2018-08-08 | Brarharman | 78 | view |
| 2018-08-10 | Le Ha Ngan | 47 | view |
- Many people believe that mobile phones cause more harms than the benefits and that's why mobile phones should be restricted?To what extent do you agree or disagree?Give reasons to support your viewpoint. 84
- The presence of technology in the classroom has become more and more apparent and offers students tremendous resources with which to supplement their education. Given time, technology will completely replace the traditional teacher in the classroom.Do you 89
- Some people think that schools have to be more entertaining, while others think that their sole purpose is to educate.Which do you agree with?Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. 11
- Different cultures are mixing today and the world is becoming a global village. Is it a positive or negative development in your opinion? To what extent do you support this development? 89
- Many teachers assign homework to students every day. Do you think that daily homework is necessary for students?Use specific reasons and details to support your answer. 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 356, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...ies could embark on CCTV installations, so as to closely monitor for threats. For exampl...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 183, Rule ID: BUT_NEVERTHELESS[1]
Message: Use simply 'but'.
Suggestion: but
...tions exist to mitigate such drawbacks, but nevertheless a definite solution has yet to be found...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, well, as to, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 24.0651302605 42% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1583.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 285.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.55438596491 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2580303045 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.041082164 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.617543859649 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.7305677171 49.4020404114 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.071428571 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3571428571 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.57142857143 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.18774397852 0.244688304435 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0591096278677 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0595050672337 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107088330147 0.151304729494 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0403237595207 0.056905535591 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.0946893788 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 50.2224549098 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.91 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.67 8.58950901804 124% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => 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.