The only effective way to deal with unemployment is to introduce rapid urbanization. How far you agree?
The importance of boosting job opportunities by investing huge budget on urbanization, which was always debatable, has now become significantly controversial. While many people are claiming that quantity of job opportunities in a market is beneficial, other rejecting this notion for many reasons. I am inclined to believe that urbanization could provide many jobs in short time, but definitely, it is not the best way of decreasing unemployment rate. This essay will discuss both positive and negative effects of rapid urbanization on sustainable job offers in the market and thus, will reach a logical conclusion.
On the one hand, rapid urbanization usually makes not well developed and pure city infrastructures. Based on the statistical research conducted by the University of Arizona, rapid urbanization needs a large budget. The study revealed that every million of dollars spent on urbanization made 100 jobs in the market while we can offer 150 posts by spending the same money on advanced biotech companies. Needless to say that building city infrastructure is not an ongoing job and building companies' workers need to move to another area after the urbanization plan is finished in the first five years. Thus, urbanization would not be the best option to boost job opportunities in a market.
On the other hand, pure infrastructure caused an ongoing maintenance cost. Based on what is published recently by social scientists at the Harward Urbanization Reseach Department, cost of maintaining pure city infrastructures like railroads and bridges could surpass the building expenses in the first seven years. Moreover, railroads in pure conditions also caused more problems for local people who are using it on a daily basis. Issues like delays in a subways system might lead to waste a considerable amount of money for local businesses and international companies who have regional offices in cities. Thus, expending a colossal budget with a reasonable amount of time and having a detailed plan for urbanization provide more benefits to the city rather than lunching many parallel urbanization projects in a town.
In conclusion to the arguments outlined above, one can be observed that the rapid urbanization costs a lot of money and the result is not always what we expected. Pure city infrastructures and short time job opportunities are just one of the huge negative impacts on city inhabitant. As far as I concerned, If we want to boost job offers and provide a better life we can invest in advanced technologies such as remote working, mobile applications developer and mass communications service providers that can offer permanent job offers for employee, and they do not need to commute between suburbs into town, while they are connected extensively from their home offices by internet. Urbanization is one of the 21th-century necessity but boosing jobs definitely is not one of its numerous benefits.
- In an educational system, assessment through formal written examination still valid? 77
- Violence portrayed on TV and in the movies leads to an increase in crime in our society. People who watch violent movies are more likely to become criminals. Do you agree or disagree? 80
- It is argued that getting married before finishing school or getting a job is not a good choice. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 88
- In some countries around the world, voting is compulsory.Do you agree with the notion of compulsory voting? 85
- It is argued that getting married before finishing school or getting a job is not a good choice. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 85
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...thus, will reach a logical conclusion. On the one hand, rapid urbanization usua...
^^^^
Line 3, column 292, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on of dollars spent on urbanization made 100 jobs in the market while we can offe...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o boost job opportunities in a market. On the other hand, pure infrastructure c...
^^^^
Line 5, column 458, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'subways'' or 'subway's'?
Suggestion: subways'; subway's
... a daily basis. Issues like delays in a subways system might lead to waste a considerab...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...allel urbanization projects in a town. In conclusion to the arguments outlined...
^^^^
Line 7, column 437, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'applications'' or 'application's'?
Suggestion: applications'; application's
...nologies such as remote working, mobile applications developer and mass communications servi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, in conclusion, in short, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.5418719212 142% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 6.10837438424 196% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 8.36945812808 167% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 31.9359605911 188% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 5.75862068966 295% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2473.0 1207.87684729 205% => Less number of characters wanted.
No of words: 466.0 242.827586207 192% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30686695279 5.00649968141 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64618479453 3.92707691288 118% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16193979817 2.71678728327 116% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 139.433497537 177% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530042918455 0.580463131201 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 802.8 379.143842365 212% => syllable counts are too long.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 12.6551724138 142% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 71.509755011 50.4703680194 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.388888889 104.977214359 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8888888889 20.9669160288 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.88888888889 7.25397266985 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.33497536946 112% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 6.9802955665 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0548637427453 0.242375264174 23% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0191789776681 0.0925447433944 21% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0245081981314 0.071462118173 34% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0362672540663 0.151781067708 24% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0264771222794 0.0609392437508 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 12.6369458128 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 53.1260098522 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 11.5310837438 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.32886699507 111% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 55.0591133005 234% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.94827586207 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.1111111111 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 10.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.