Traveling inside is more beneficial
Traveling, as we all know, for the majority of people, is a pleasant activity. Due to the paramount importance of travel on people's life, efforts for elevating its effectiveness have always been among the top priorities of sociologists. In this regard, many believe that one’s traveling inside the country is more beneficial than going to a foreign country. Similarly, I believe that traveling inside a country’s boundary provide people with more benefits. I will delve into two conspicuous reasons to elaborate on my standpoint.
The first reason that makes me hold the belief that traveling inbound has its advantages is related to the effects of tourism on the local economy. Undoubtedly, economic condition, for the majority of countries, is a crucial issue and attracts attention to itself. Because the more welfare society has, the more satisfactory feelings show by citizens. In other words, different countries by variation in the economy try to create jobs and make society’s members satisfied. One of the methods that are practical for many economies is tourism, especially when the local traveling is promoted and welcomed. Tourism makes and accelerates money circulation. The favorable effects of travelers like the money they spend in the region, the homes, the foods, and the accommodations visitors need all in all make the economic situation better for residents. What would happen if this money spent in other countries? Needless to say, all monetary benefits would be deviating from one's country to another.
Another equally noteworthy reason to bear in mind is the effect of travel on mutual communication and companionship feelings. Without a doubt, traveling not only shape or reform one's characteristics but also it is helpful for a person to understand other cultures- the different cultures or tribes who live within a country- better. In fact, traveling is a very appropriate way to make people familiar with each other. Thus, having a journey inside a country will be helpful for residents to boost knowledge about the hometown. Although many critics may challenge this idea and debate that traveling outside boundaries bring more valuable experiences because a person has a chance to meet totally different people, the effects of voyage inside a country on the patriotism feelings and sympathy show otherwise. Scientifically speaking, the advocacy toward the country and better understanding among citizens reach the top point when people visit their own country.
To summarize, contemplating all remarks, we can safely conclude that, inbound tourism will be beneficial both for people and governments. It increases money circulation inside the country. Besides, it makes people understand more about the/their hometown.
- life worsen 90
- in order to increase the quality of education it is necessary for universities to spend more money as a salary of professors 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Human activity is making the earth a worse place to live Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 90
- What do you feel is the best way to solve when you face difficult problems in life 73
- The chart below gives information about global population percentages and the distribution of wealth by region Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 95
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 971, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...netary benefits would be deviating from ones country to another. Another equally ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 179, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...ubt, traveling not only shape or reform ones characteristics but also it is helpful ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, if, may, similarly, so, thus, in fact, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 43.0788530466 58% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2336.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 429.0 407.700716846 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44522144522 4.8611393121 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55107846309 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95970295081 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 212.727598566 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566433566434 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 734.4 618.680645161 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.203111679 48.9658058833 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.565217391 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.652173913 20.6045352989 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.47826086957 5.45110844103 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.85842293907 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.298472647233 0.236089414692 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0834098768085 0.076458572812 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101063610103 0.0737576698707 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202167581657 0.150856017488 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0840516297025 0.0645574589148 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 11.7677419355 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 58.1214874552 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.33 10.9000537634 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 86.8835125448 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.