Question :Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Using a car as the one of daily life habits of modern human has its own drawbacks and positive point. The vast majority of society believe using cars to doing your personal affairs such as going to work or shopping is inevitable due to poor transportation facilities. They state that you can save time by using your automobile. In contrast, many urban planners believe air pollution will be one of critical problems in the future. Today many large cities have terrible air conditions. I, as an environmentalist, think the government will invest more money in transportation, and in the future citizens will use more public transportation than their private cars. In what follows, I will pinpoint the two most primary rationales to elaborate on my viewpoint.
The first reason to champion this standpoint is, according to numerous studies have conducted on causes of people's death have shown that air pollution can increase the risk of getting fatal diseases such as cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular, and even heart disease. For example, the Center of Disease Control publish an article about the rate of death in the cities in which using of personal car is much more than standard international standard rate. The article concluded the government need to investigate in improve and construct public transportation such as BRT(bus rapid transit) or metro to reduce the dependency on cars and increase the quality of life. government by make transit more convenient can make them more attractive for citizens.
Moreover, I strongly believe traffic is getting terrible especially in crowded cities. People later or soon will find that using public transportation is a time efficient and cost-effective choice. To be more specific, they can use convenient, cheap, and fast transit such as BRT to go to their work or university. By using transit they can save money that could be paid for car's maintenance cost. Besides, they can use their time more effective. For instance they are able to read e-books or news when they are going to their work in transit.
Based on what mentioned we can safely conclude that, there will be fewer cars in the city in the future. Because using cars not only can pose threat to our health and can increase the risk of fatal disease but also it is not cost-effective and time efficient choice for commuter traveling.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-23 | YasamanEsml | 76 | view |
| 2023-04-13 | sonyeoso | 76 | view |
| 2023-01-11 | theprasad | 73 | view |
| 2023-01-04 | Mangiring Pandapotan | 83 | view |
| 2022-11-05 | daddy | 70 | view |
- Solving environmental problems is the best way for the government to improve public health 70
- Solving environmental problems is the best way for the government to improve public health 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Overall the widespread use of the internet has a mostly positive effect on life in today s world Use reasons and details to support your opinion 76
- Question Do you agree or disagree with the following statement In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Students are more influenced by their teachers than by their friends 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 663, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Government
... cars and increase the quality of life. government by make transit more convenient can mak...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, if, moreover, so, for example, for instance, in contrast, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 52.1666666667 86% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1962.0 1977.66487455 99% => OK
No of words: 390.0 407.700716846 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03076923077 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44391917772 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8545959344 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 212.727598566 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535897435897 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 617.4 618.680645161 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.928637838 48.9658058833 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.263157895 100.406767564 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5263157895 20.6045352989 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84210526316 5.45110844103 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
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: 0.20084180807 0.236089414692 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0679979378348 0.076458572812 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0467378658409 0.0737576698707 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12921403765 0.150856017488 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0602136835385 0.0645574589148 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 11.7677419355 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 10.9000537634 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 86.8835125448 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.