The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.
"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
In a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazzette, the author dictates his concerns and his suggested solution to the stated issue regarding vehicle accidents, particularly accidents revolving around mopeds in the summer where the population burgeons. The author suggests that by reducing the number of mopeds rented during the summer, the number of accidents will decline. However, before this proposal is executed, it is essential that the suggestion be meticulously analyzed, the implications be scrupulously addressed, and the answers to two questions be fully obtained.
Firstly, do the accidents that frequently occur include mopeds? The author portrays that by reducing one mode of transportation will achieve a significant reduction in vehicle accidents. However, there is no provided data that suggests that most of the accidents, or any, involve mopeds. It could be that many accidents involved cars and trucks rather than the mopeds. Due to this insufficient knowledge of data, reducing the moped rental may give a stagnant result regarding the number of accidents on the roads. In order to determine whether or not the reduction of moped rentals would be beneficial, it must be proved that many accidents are caused specifically due to the high volume of moped transportation on the roads. If the situation that dictates that other vehicles are the cause of concern regarding accidents is valid, then the original supposition averred by the author is drastically attenuated.
Secondly, even if many accidents do occur due to mopeds, do the economic and financial reduction of mopeds outweigh the casualties and injuries caused by the accidents. Statistically, there are many casualties linked with car accidents, but no decrease in sales or rentals due to this reason. So, without providing priority to finances over an individual's life, one must still weigh that advantages and the disadvantages of replacing one aspect with another for both the consumers and the sellers. As said in the passage, mopeds are a common form of transportation. One reason it must be common could be of the price or that it is easily accessible. If the rentals were to reduce their rental quantity, then many people would have to look elsewhere for transportation. Perhaps they would utilize a bus or a taxi, they might even use a bicycle or rent a car. As far as we know, with the limited data on hand, any of these modes of transportation have equal risk of an accident. Not only are they similar in their vulnerability, they may also increase the consumers' expenses as well as decreasing revenue of the moped rental owners. So without concrete data that displays sufficient information against mopeds, the primary suggestion is significantly deteriorated. In order to determine whether the opportunity cost of decreasing rentals is favorable, it must be determined that the benefits brought by prevention of accidents exceed the benefits of keeping the rentals as is.
In conclusion, the proposal indicated by the author is severely blemished due to is dependence on copious unjustified presumptions. If the author can provide adequate evidence, cogent reasoning to corroborate the claim, and sufficient remedies to the inquiries, then further explication and analysis of the suggested proposal is possible.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 527 350
No. of Characters: 2725 1500
No. of Different Words: 251 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.791 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.171 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.96 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 217 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 166 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 129 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 85 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.913 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.712 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.609 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.44 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.059 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 537, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...nts on the roads. In order to determine whether or not the reduction of moped rentals would be...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 345, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
... providing priority to finances over an individuals life, one must still weigh that advanta...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, look, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, well, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2797.0 2260.96107784 124% => OK
No of words: 527.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30740037951 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79129216042 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05069524269 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 204.123752495 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485768500949 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 896.4 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3659509284 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.608695652 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9130434783 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5652173913 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.150949615141 0.218282227539 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0455384057078 0.0743258471296 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.065803711417 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0959936931372 0.128457276422 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0852688641066 0.0628817314937 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 152.0 98.500998004 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.