The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting the supply of new housing, could lead to significant increases in the price of housing in the county. Proponents of the measure note that Chestnut County established a similar measure ten years ago, and its housing prices have increased only modestly since. However, opponents of the measure note that Pine County adopted restrictions on the development of new residential housing fifteen years ago, and its housing prices have since more than doubled. The council currently predicts that the proposed measure, if passed, will result in a significant increase in housing prices in Maple County.
The argument here contempts that if they will propose a measure in Maple county about the restrictions in supply of new housing, then the reaction to that will be significant increase in housing prices of the county. Suggested argument by the council of Maple county is merely based on some faulty predictions and observations, with which I do not agree at all. There are numerous flaws in the argument which should be looked and though upon by the council members to have the result in their favor.
The threshold problem here is that the council has compared themselves with two more counties which we even do not know about in detail. The argument here tells nothing about the reason why the other two counties proposed a restriction and eventually what were the implications of it and in which manner. Also both of the counties had different results after applying different restrictions and none of them gives the proper information in detail, why the reaction was seen in that particular way only? So that gives the particular flaw about the argument which should be thought upon.
What is more imortant here is, that the county members should do a survey about certain questions in their own county like, why farmland is being overdeveloped? What are the reasons behind people only going for that? What other than restrictions on the sources would help them reach the target they want to achieve? How they can apply different remedies against the day by day rising problem? If they make such restrictions, then what will be the affects of it on the people? WIll it be acceptable by the people? I think the county members should be working on these questions to take a step further and not take decisions based on other counties.
Adding to these basic problems of the argument, they might have ignored the fact that the counties applied such restrictions way back in the past, like ten and fifteen years ago, which is a huge time. That makes us think of the credibility of the argument made by the county members. How can they make such baseless observations and not consider time a factor while considering it as the pivot reason. It could be possible that after applying the restrictions based on this factor and would turn against them at the end. Which makes the argument spurious and needs another thought.
In the end, I would like to conclude that based on the flaws which we can think of directly and are the major ones which can lead to many unwanted reactions, the county members should rather be thinking of those and how can they eliminate them to make a final decision which should be reliable and trusted. I insist that more of the work should be done in their own county, and the others should be seen just as mere examples, not the essentials.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The argument here contempts that if they...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ers to have the result in their favor. The threshold problem here is that the c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 317, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...implications of it and in which manner. Also both of the counties had different resu...
^^^^
Line 2, column 515, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[3]
Message: “So that” 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.
...n was seen in that particular way only? So that gives the particular flaw about the arg...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...argument which should be thought upon. What is more imortant here is, that the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 228, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...sons behind people only going for that? What other than restrictions on the sources ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ake decisions based on other counties. Adding to these basic problems of the ar...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nt spurious and needs another thought. In the end, I would like to conclude tha...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'if', 'look', 'so', 'then', 'while', 'i think', 'what is more']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.204633204633 0.25644967241 80% => OK
Verbs: 0.164092664093 0.15541462614 106% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0714285714286 0.0836205057962 85% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0501930501931 0.0520304965353 96% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0521235521236 0.0272364105082 191% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.133204633205 0.125424944231 106% => OK
Participles: 0.0444015444015 0.0416121511921 107% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.4912755013 2.79052419416 89% => OK
Infinitives: 0.015444015444 0.026700313972 58% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.125482625483 0.113004496875 111% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.042471042471 0.0255425247493 166% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.042471042471 0.0127820249294 332% => Maybe 'Which' is overused. If other WH_determiners like 'Who, What, Whom, Whose...' are used too in sentences, then there are no issues.
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2815.0 2731.13054187 103% => OK
No of words: 484.0 446.07635468 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.81611570248 6.12365571057 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69041575982 4.57801047555 102% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.29958677686 0.378187486979 79% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.22520661157 0.287650121315 78% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.154958677686 0.208842608468 74% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0743801652893 0.135150697306 55% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4912755013 2.79052419416 89% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 207.018472906 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.460743801653 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 52.3495189597 52.1807786196 100% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0476190476 23.2022227129 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.2416838693 57.7814097925 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.047619048 141.986410481 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0476190476 23.2022227129 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.380952380952 0.724660767414 53% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 3.58251231527 223% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 45.5682802046 51.9672348444 88% => OK
Elegance: 1.4347826087 1.8405768891 78% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.531754625562 0.441005458295 121% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.129492666786 0.135418324435 96% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0845425242686 0.0829849096947 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.577154300382 0.58762219726 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.139658245525 0.147661913831 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.236243313801 0.193483328276 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0970924863005 0.0970749176394 100% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.488818859068 0.42659136922 115% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0383705520908 0.0774707102158 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.398724917764 0.312017818177 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0574286202146 0.0698173142475 82% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.33743842365 60% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.87684729064 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.82512315271 145% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.82389162562 212% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 14.657635468 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.