Today, the quality of life in large cities is decreasing. Discuss the causes and solutions.
The global phenomenon of urbanisation from the beginning of industrialisation to the present day has brought opportunity and prosperity, albeit at a cost in the quality of life. With an increasing city population, the complexity of the challenges also increases, the causes and solutions for this are outlined below.
The causes for the decrease in the quality of life are paradoxically the prosperity endowed on such metropolitan centres. Their growth is largely due to the increase of opportunities on offer, which in turn increases their attractiveness, essentially they are trapped in a positive self enforcing cycle. However, this eventually leads to a decrease in the quality of life as the city can experience overcrowding, exorbitant property prices, and increased vulnerability to terrorist attacks. For example the density of London makes it a more efficient place to attack, when compared to a smaller city such as Bradford. Therefore, due to continuous growth and prosperity, urban citizens, especially the less well off, often experience a lower standard of living.
Considering the solutions, greater investment in public transport would ease traffic congestion, as would bike lanes. In theory this would reduce air pollution, and possibly improve the well-being of the population if they did adopt a more active lifestyle and cycle to work. To counter violent terrorist attacks, cities could embark on CCTV installations, so as to closely monitor for threats. For example, it is said, the CCTV in London has foiled many potential attacks, and therefore greatly increased the security of its citizens.
To conclude, a wealthy city attracts large population inflows, which then cause pressure on existing infrastructure and security. Various solutions exist to mitigate such drawbacks, nevertheless an indefinite solution has yet to be found.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 359, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...ies could embark on CCTV installations, so as to closely monitor for threats. For exampl...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'however', 'if', 'nevertheless', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'well', 'as to', 'for example', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.270186335404 0.247107183377 109% => OK
Verbs: 0.139751552795 0.155533422707 90% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0807453416149 0.0946595960268 85% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0590062111801 0.0501214627716 118% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0217391304348 0.0437548338989 50% => OK
Prepositions: 0.11801242236 0.122226691241 97% => OK
Participles: 0.0341614906832 0.0403226058552 85% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.21359454577 2.80594681477 115% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0403726708075 0.0326793684256 124% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00163938923432 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.105590062112 0.0861772015684 123% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0155279503106 0.021408717616 73% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00931677018634 0.011925033212 78% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1866.0 1933.35771543 97% => OK
No of words: 285.0 316.048096192 90% => OK
Chars per words: 6.54736842105 6.12580529183 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20517956788 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.438596491228 0.374742101984 117% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.368421052632 0.28420135186 130% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.284210526316 0.203846283523 139% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.20350877193 0.137316102897 148% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21359454577 2.80594681477 115% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.037074148 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.617543859649 0.56093040696 110% => OK
Word variations: 69.0746120209 60.7387585426 114% => OK
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0891783567 81% => OK
Sentence length: 21.9230769231 20.7743622355 106% => OK
Sentence length SD: 24.8329328959 49.517814964 50% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.538461538 127.492653851 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9230769231 20.7743622355 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.846153846154 0.814263465372 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38877755511 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.99599198397 25% => OK
Readability: 58.7651821862 49.1944974215 119% => OK
Elegance: 1.91549295775 1.69124875643 113% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.450057391344 0.332605444948 135% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.105938413886 0.102741220458 103% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0774829851905 0.0668466124924 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.582290864365 0.534860350844 109% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.11864998564 0.148594505496 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.187763966326 0.134430193775 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.122766377141 0.0742795772207 165% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.365058452443 0.324371583561 113% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.165412767793 0.0638462369009 259% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.290784626849 0.228012699653 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.14403506172 0.058150111329 248% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.68436873747 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.41683366733 29% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 5.90881763527 85% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 2.5751503006 116% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 1.9629258517 51% => OK
Total topic words: 9.0 10.4468937876 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.