It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation
Generally speaking, in the current state of affairs we observe, in which the governments have a highlighted role for progress of every country, it is safe for one to assume that their spending money has a great effect to that end. However, what work is better for doing by the governments has been a great controversy subject in recent years. There is a rather prevalent idea regarding this issue stating that spending money on Internet access is more important than improving public transportation. I personally concur with it. In what follows, I substantiate the idea further by focusing on two fundamental reasons.
The most imperative reason coming to mind at first glance is that more progress will be obtained for a society. It goes without saying that a considerable number of works in the world are remarkably related to the Internet. If countries want to reach more success, they would plan for the field. In the past, the use of the Internet had limited to U.S army. Over time, this technology was given to ordinary persons and now we have the technology everywhere such as home, office and so on. For instance at university, If a student wants to study and resolves a challenge, he/she refers to the Internet in order to get new papers. As a result, a brilliant product can be made for a country. With this in mind, take one example from my own life. When I was studying at the University of Melbourne, I invented a new device for medical imaging. I always was in a medical laboratory for more than one year and read many papers about imaging in medical. Had I not accessed to the Internet, I would not have attained this achievement.
Another interesting point which deserves some words here is that it provides more vocations for people. Do rarely we find people's jobs which are independent of the Internet, today. Most works are done in the substrate. If governments invest more on the Internet, they would get more money. Therefore, the money comes back to the governments. Whatsoever the substrate becomes wider, the more money can be saved for the governments. From another view of point, people have more money for their families, resulting in more convenient for them. For instance, Norway is the best country in the world due to (because of) having the lowest unemployment rate in the world. I remembered the government had invested 1 Billion Dollar for improving Internet access in 2018 and they saw the excellent result at the end of the year.
In summary, taking all the aforementioned into consideration, one can presume that being important spending more money on Internet access by the government is due to more progress for the countries as well as more money for people and government. Thus, it is recommended governments care about this issue for having a more brilliant future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 350, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: S
...he use of the Internet had limited to U.S army. Over time, this technology was gi...
^
Line 2, column 842, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[4]
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually put after the verb 'was'.
Suggestion: was always
...ted a new device for medical imaging. I always was in a medical laboratory for more than o...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1027, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uld not have attained this achievement. Another interesting point which deserves...
^^^^
Line 3, column 105, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[9]
Message: The adverb 'rarely' is usually put before the verb 'Do'.
Suggestion: Rarely Do
... it provides more vocations for people. Do rarely we find peoples jobs which are independ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance, in summary, such as, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 43.0788530466 86% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 52.1666666667 119% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2330.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 481.0 407.700716846 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84407484407 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68313059816 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78646780286 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 212.727598566 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519750519751 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 742.5 618.680645161 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.9533389957 48.9658058833 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.2962962963 100.406767564 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8148148148 20.6045352989 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2962962963 5.45110844103 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.88709677419 246% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.42946297558 0.236089414692 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104378805077 0.076458572812 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109972568884 0.0737576698707 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.291624401726 0.150856017488 193% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0786734906681 0.0645574589148 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 11.7677419355 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 58.1214874552 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.1575268817 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 10.9000537634 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 86.8835125448 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.