Car ownership has increased so rapidly over the past thirty years that many cities in the world are now 'one big traffic jam'.
How true do you think this statement is?
What measures can governments take to discourage people from using their cars?
For the last three decades, more and more cars have been sold and put into use. Hence, many cities around the world are facing a huge problem of traffic jams. In my view, I believe that the increasing number of car ownership does cause severe traffic jams. However, some solutions can be taken by the governments to tackle this problem.
There are several reasons why I think that the increasing of car use is severely causing traffic jams. Over the past thirty years, manufacturers have improved their products in both the exterior and the interior which satisfies their customers. Therefore, owning a car has become a trend among individuals. Consequently, this trend leads to big severe traffic jams in modern cities. When a large number of vehicles travelling at the same time, the roads' space is narrowed which restricts cars' movements. In time, more vehicle from behind will make the jam more severe.
However, there are a few strategies that can be taken by governments to solve this problem. Firstly, since the main reason i due to a high proportion of car ownership, governments can enact laws to control the number of cars owned by each family. For example, Vietnam Congress has established a law that forces people to pay double taxes if they own more than two vehicles; since then, the number of cars has vastly decreased. Secondly, governments can also discourage individuals from using their own cars by promoting and improving public transportation. With more modern subway trains and buses, people will recognize the convenience of these means of transport. As a result, less cars are used and less traffic jams occur.
In conclusion, I believe there possible ways that governments around the world can take to address severe traffic jams in the time when personal vehicles are increasing quickly.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-07-28 | misha grover | 73 | view |
| 2018-04-24 | drtruong92 | 73 | view |
- Some people think that computers and the Internet are more important for a child’s education than going to school. But other believe that schools and teachers are essential for children to learn effectively. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 73
- More and more people are opting for ready-made food instead of freshly cooked food. Do this development has more advantages over disadvantages? 78
- Today large shopping center and supermarkets are more common than small local shops Is this a negative or positive development 51
- Foreign tourists should be charged more than local people when visiting cultural and historical attractions in that country To what extent do you agree or disagree 71
- Some people think international car free days are an effective way of reducing air pollution others think there are some other ways Discuss both views and give your own opinion 81
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 389, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ere traffic jams in modern cities. When a large number of vehicles travelling at the same time, t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 641, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this means' or 'these means'?
Suggestion: this means; these means
...eople will recognize the convenience of these means of transport. As a result, less cars ar...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 680, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun cars is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... these means of transport. As a result, less cars are used and less traffic jams occ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, for example, i think, in conclusion, as a result, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1521.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 302.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03642384106 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65262377216 2.80592935109 95% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576158940397 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 466.2 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.6158878308 49.4020404114 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.4705882353 106.682146367 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7647058824 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.11764705882 7.06120827912 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.9879759519 251% => Less 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: 0.318614436032 0.244688304435 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10048935471 0.084324248473 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0467173542369 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.191127922739 0.151304729494 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0282058723878 0.056905535591 50% => 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: 11.2 13.0946893788 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 50.2224549098 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.3001002004 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.58950901804 95% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.