In some countries, governments decide to spend money in railways, others invest in roads. Personally, I think that is better to spend resources in railroads for a few reasons I will expose in the further paragraphs.
First of all, assuming that railways are talking about modern trains, I think that railways are a better option to spend money on because it leads to the alternative to use of trains instead of cars. In addition, using trains over cars helps with decontamination, and contamination is a major issue nowadays that every government should be worried about. For example, I live in Chile, whose capital city, Santiago, is one of the most contaminated cities over the world. During the last 5 or 6 years, the government has been investing in reactivate old railways and it has helped to reduce contamination. Moreover, this investment gives citizens a responsible message, that the government worries about them and future generations.
Secondly, I believe that is cheaper for everyone to use trains rather than cars, and more railroads may promote the use of trains. Using a car carries a lot of expences with it: maintenence, fuel, parking, tolls, among others. On the other hand, using trains may be expensive, but nothing compared with car usage. For instance, here in Chile, a one-way trip to Temuco, that is 660 km away from Santiago, may cost, considering every item, between 50.000 and 70.000 Chilean pesos depending on the type of car. And a train ticket cost between 30.000 and 40.000, a lot cheaper.
As a conclusion, I think governments should spend their money in railways instead of roads mainly for two reasons. Firstly, it encourages people to leave cars at home and use trains promoting decontamination, and it also gives citizens a cheaper way of transportation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 217, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... will expose in the further paragraphs. First of all, assuming that railways are...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 575, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tween 30.000 and 40.000, a lot cheaper. As a conclusion, I think governments sho...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, for example, for instance, i think, in addition, talking about, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1504.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 298.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04697986577 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92752877964 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.041082164 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590604026846 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 452.7 506.74238477 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.1538445287 49.4020404114 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.428571429 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2857142857 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3571428571 7.06120827912 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162791432669 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0599575975905 0.084324248473 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0430540190669 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110211045878 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0322165850211 0.056905535591 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 50.2224549098 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.01 12.4159519038 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.