Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Drivers have to pay a fee for driving in busy city streets when there is a great amount of traffic. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion.
Nowadays, traffic congestion has made our lives more difficult, especially in big cities during rush hours. In my opinion, I believe it is vitally necessary that governments do solve the road congestion issue by requiring the charges of automobile drivers during heavy-traffic times. I feel that way for two reasons.
First, this policy will save city dwellers ' lives and money. To be more specific, road congestion leads to car crashes, and thus, losses in innocents' lives and money of their expensive vehicles. For example, I live in Cairo, Egypt, the most populous metropolitan capital in the Arab World. We do experience a risky living due to roadway crowdedness. According to statistical figures, Cairo confronts the highest rate of road accidents in the region due to wheels crashes, which place human lives and autos in- danger during commuting. Therefore, if our officials impose a toll on drivers, who use central streets during crowding hours, they will compel them to use different roads away from transportation jam areas. In- anticipation of implanting this policy, we can presume an enormous reduction in car accidents. As you can see, Cairo residents, like millions of others, the in emergency need of that policy for the sake of their lives and properties.
Besides, another remarkably potential reason for adopting a traffic' tariff plan is the higher likelihood of generating revenue, which can be employed by officials to solve traffic issues once and for all. To illustrate, through tolls money, governments can subsidize road infrastructure, constructing new bridges, and maintains public transportations in excellent status. For example, in Egypt, the administrators command extra cost for using highways between big cities such as the coastal and desert roads. Obviously, from the admirable current condition of that road, it exploits the traffic fees to sustain it that way. So, the administrators may follow the same path inside busy centers in downtown and vital squares to invest in traffic projects and put an end to problems associated with it; otherwise, there would not be any funds to support roads' plan.
In conclusion, I undoubtedly opt for the strategy of charging drivers inside the dense traffic areas. Not only because it will make people feel secured regarding their lives and money, but also its funds will contribute to the betterment of the traffic crowding crisis.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Nowadays, traffic congestion has made ou...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...imes. I feel that way for two reasons. First, this policy will save city dwelle...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 48, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rst, this policy will save city dwellers lives and money. To be more specific, ro...
^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he sake of their lives and properties. Besides, another remarkably potential re...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... be any funds to support roads plan. In conclusion, I undoubtedly opt for the...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, if, may, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, i feel, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 15.1003584229 33% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 43.0788530466 65% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 52.1666666667 105% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2033.0 1977.66487455 103% => OK
No of words: 384.0 407.700716846 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29427083333 4.8611393121 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87476292614 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 212.727598566 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.622395833333 0.524837075471 119% => OK
syllable_count: 619.2 618.680645161 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0274794823 48.9658058833 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.944444444 100.406767564 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3333333333 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 5.45110844103 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16787967044 0.236089414692 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0494864317028 0.076458572812 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0364501253903 0.0737576698707 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101470640676 0.150856017488 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0386494509227 0.0645574589148 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 11.7677419355 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 10.9000537634 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.01818996416 118% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 86.8835125448 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.