Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations.
The arguments claims that if a transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to reach subway stations rather than drive there, it will either reduce of buses fare or increase the price of parking at subway stations. To support the argument, author says that new subway train uses is increasing and commuter use of shuttle buses to station is below projected volume. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. Hence, the conclusion of argument relies on several assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. The argument is weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.
The arguments readily assumes that train commuters are only customers of shuttles buses. If commuters rides the shuttle bus then fares will reduce. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For example, it could be possible that buses are already operating at full capacity. If it were the case, then the fares would not be reduced as there is no places for any commuter in the bus. The argument could have been much clearer if the arguments provide evidences of current capacity of buses.
The argument claims that when people drive to subway stations, it will increase the price of parking there. There is no evidence provided by the argument to support this statement. Price of parking at a place depends on several factors such location, traffic of customer, and management of parking. No details was given about any such factors.
Thirdly, the arguments is providing correlation and causal relationship. If any event happens before another events, it does not mean the former is the cause of latter. Evidence and supporting statements are required to established such relationship.
Without any data about location of parking, how use of shuttle buses reduce of the fares of shuttle buses, how commuters ride to shuttle buses would increase the price of parking at the subway stations, argument would remain be flawed.
In order to assess the merits of a certain situation / decision, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this particular case we requirs locations, proper reasoning, etc. Without these informations, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-12-31 | lucky123456 | 60 | view |
- Traveling to other countries is a way for people to take time away from their daily worries While visiting a foreign country some people like to go to the tourist attractions while others prefer going to quiet places where they can truly enjoy the country 90
- Some people suggest that it is wrong to give money to beggars asking for money on the street, while others think that it is the right thing to do. Which point of view do you think is correct, and why? 70
- "The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in 35
- Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company s projections However commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume If the transit company expects commuters to ride the s 60
- Print media, including Magazines and newspapers, will soon be completely replaced by internet news source. 66
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 12 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 375 350
No. of Characters: 1866 1500
No. of Different Words: 181 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.401 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.976 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.605 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 144 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.857 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.604 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.381 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.293 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.541 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.05 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 15, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'claim'.
Suggestion: claim
The arguments claims that if a transit company expects commu...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 90, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s are only customers of shuttles buses. If commuters rides the shuttle bus then fa...
^^
Line 4, column 356, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are no places'?
Suggestion: there are no places
... then the fares would not be reduced as there is no places for any commuter in the bus. The argume...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 311, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[5]
Message: You should probably use: 'were'.
Suggestion: were
..., and management of parking. No details was given about any such factors. Third...
^^^
Line 8, column 252, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uired to established such relationship. Without any data about location of parki...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, so, then, third, thirdly, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1934.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 375.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15733333333 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40055868397 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70535073316 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.509333333333 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 606.6 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.9911321009 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.9090909091 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0454545455 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.40909090909 5.70786347227 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.253024487016 0.218282227539 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0664697451374 0.0743258471296 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11979710131 0.0701772020484 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118587603953 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125217968213 0.0628817314937 199% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
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.