Should government build more road to allow more vehicle owner or improve the network of public transport?
Recently, the influence of the government on ease of transportation has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question “should government build more road to allow more vehicle owner or improve the network of public transport?”. Whereas it is a widely held view that government should remain liable for this issue, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the environmental standpoint, building new highways is bound up inextricably with major infrastructure, which indicates they lead to both being advanced and commonwealth. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2014 demonstrates the relationship between environmental factors and a new lifestyle as well as an exponential increase in social benefits. Their academic criticism was impressive. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far supports the contention that the likelihood of ever-increasing development is correlated positively with not only globalization but also universality.
Within the realm of society, without the slightest doubt, public transportation attribute to municipal duties, in that it would come down to urban sprawl, traffic crawling, and passengers. A salient example of such attribution is a social agenda, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take a feasible solution for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint the current system problems. Besides, this criterion is an indispensable part of modern lifestyle. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal role of surveillance.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes “all’s well that ends well,” after analyzing what elaborated above, I entirely agree that government should remain liable for this issue. However, with the benefit of hindsight, we conceive the more we research, the further we discover.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, hence, however, if, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 20.9802955665 110% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 31.9359605911 116% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 5.75862068966 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1667.0 1207.87684729 138% => OK
No of words: 292.0 242.827586207 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.70890410959 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34614628654 2.71678728327 123% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 139.433497537 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.674657534247 0.580463131201 116% => OK
syllable_count: 504.9 379.143842365 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.6157635468 152% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 1.71428571429 175% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.5519635496 50.4703680194 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.230769231 104.977214359 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4615384615 20.9669160288 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.46153846154 7.25397266985 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 6.9802955665 143% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.27222869739 0.242375264174 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0717256395624 0.0925447433944 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.171021198013 0.071462118173 239% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164545590909 0.151781067708 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.208255709567 0.0609392437508 342% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 12.6369458128 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.1260098522 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.9458128079 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.41 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 55.0591133005 191% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.