Replacing the Mathescam Bridge, which links Ottenville with Tottenville, will prove far less beneficial than would repairing the existing structure. The project will unjustly hurt drivers because the Ottenville mayor recommended - shortly just before $12 million new bridge proposal was announced - that bridge tolls be raised by 50 percent. Since drivers' main complaints have been uneven pavement and closed lanes, the Mathescam bridge Authority should not hike tolls and instead repair the existing bridge, shifting maintenance crews to the evening, when a few drivers are on the roads.
The argument as mentioned above says that the repairing the bridge rather than replacing it will be a better alternative. However the argument, as mentioned above is flawed in many ways.
First, it mentions the cost of replacing the bridge. However the cost, if repaired, is not mentioned here. That should be taken into consideration since if the repairing cost is somewhat lose (or close to even half of the budget for replacing, the replacing will be more viable. This is because the life of the bridge, if replaced, will obviously be higher than life if the bridge is repaired. For approximation, the former will be more than twice the later. So initial large investment will be more economical in the long run.
The argument even doesn’t takes into consideration the frequency of the vehicle if the toll is raised. If the frequency is reducing substantially, then obviously it will not benefitted to both sides. It will unnecessarily increase the debt on the authority and inconvenience to the rider.
The kind of vehicles passing through bridge should be taken into account since that will impact the life of the repaired bridge. Obviously if heavy vehicles pass mostly, the repair will not be impactful. Also heavy vehicle drivers prefer to drive mostly in night. So if maintenance work is shifted in night, it will increase traffic and congestion.
Also diversion of routes, how inconvenient will it be for the riders and its impact on traffic should be taken into account before taking the final call.
Hence, the argument lacks clarity in supporting its decision. It is incomplete since various facts supporting the argument are missing and so those facts should be taken into consideration and analysed properly. Hence, those facts and analysis should be taken into account before making the decision.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-29 | mmahadevan | 73 | view |
| 2019-09-30 | adarshad3 | 68 | view |
- Replacing the Mathescam Bridge which links Ottenville with Tottenville will prove far less beneficial than would repairing the existing structure The project will unjustly hurt drivers because the Ottenville mayor recommended shortly just before 12 millio 68
- In recent years the worldwide demand for fish has grown and improvements in fishing technology have made larger catches and thus increased supply possible for example last year s tuna catch was 9 percent greater than the previous year s To capitalize on t 58
- "The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is no 75
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 301 350
No. of Characters: 1473 1500
No. of Different Words: 139 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.165 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.894 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.659 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 104 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 73 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 55 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.842 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.175 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.842 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.6 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 123, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...lacing it will be a better alternative. However the argument, as mentioned above is fla...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 54, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...tions the cost of replacing the bridge. However the cost, if repaired, is not mentioned...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 188, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'lost'.
Suggestion: lost
...since if the repairing cost is somewhat lose or close to even half of the budget for...
^^^^
Line 5, column 180, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'benefit'
Suggestion: benefit
...bstantially, then obviously it will not benefitted to both sides. It will unnecessarily in...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 205, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...stly, the repair will not be impactful. Also heavy vehicle drivers prefer to drive m...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...will increase traffic and congestion. Also diversion of routes, how inconvenient w...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, so, then, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 55.5748502994 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1530.0 2260.96107784 68% => OK
No of words: 300.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77580018493 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 204.123752495 69% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.466666666667 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 481.5 705.55239521 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.2019893671 57.8364921388 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.5263157895 119.503703932 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.7894736842 23.324526521 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.63157894737 5.70786347227 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.148461028925 0.218282227539 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0570458663939 0.0743258471296 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0431394519014 0.0701772020484 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0825317610513 0.128457276422 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0436960231472 0.0628817314937 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 14.3799401198 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.3550499002 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.0 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 98.500998004 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.