The argument is based on unwarranted assumptions, rendering its conclusion, building a subway system will relieve the traffic and improve the economy, invalid.
First, we are not provided sufficient information about the traffic congestion. To be more specific, we don't know where the congestion occur, how often does it occur, and the root causes of the congestion. It may be that the congestion only occurs in downtown areas, which the subway system running through downtown will be helpful to solve the local traffic issue. But if the congestion is due to sudden influx of traffic from suburb areas in rush hours, the subway will not help reduce the traffic flow toward downtown if not connecting to suburb areas. Without more detailed information, it is hard to be convinced that building a subway system is going to solve the traffic issue.
Second, the argument assumes that the subway system will solve the lack of public transportation in downtown area, and also solve the inconsistency and safety issues occurs on buses. The subway will definitely help providing additional public transportation choice. But if the subway system does not run per its timetable, like the subway system in New York city, trains are almost always late, the inconsistency issue is still not eliminated. As for the safety issue, we are not sure about what safety issue the argument refers to. But with the subway running 24 hours a day, if not watched attentively during night time when less people are on the train, criminal activities could still happen.
Finally, even if the traffic issue and the lack of public transportation is solved by building a subway system, the mayor’s expectation to see economy growth, induced by relieved traffic and increased worker productivity, is unwarranted. Reducing traffic time could be beneficial to the car drivers and thus increase their productivity, however, the whole workforce may not be made up solely by motorists. It could be that other commuters like bus riders and bikers are accounted for 60 percent of the workforce, which are not affected by the subway system, in Biggsville. Without a specific data on how big is the motorist group accounted for the whole workforce, the mayors assumption totally falls apart.
With unwarranted assumptions and lacking of specific evidences and analysis, The argument fails to make a convincing case that building a subway system will solve all the current issue.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 399 350
No. of Characters: 1994 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.469 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.997 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.674 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.938 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.119 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.372 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.595 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.148 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 105, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...fic congestion. To be more specific, we dont know where the congestion occur, how of...
^^^^
Line 5, column 216, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to provide' or 'provide'.
Suggestion: to provide; provide
... buses. The subway will definitely help providing additional public transportation choice...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 628, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ched attentively during night time when less people are on the train, criminal activ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 670, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'mayors'' or 'mayor's'?
Suggestion: mayors'; mayor's
... accounted for the whole workforce, the mayors assumption totally falls apart. With...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, still, thus, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2058.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 398.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.17085427136 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46653527281 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76995663889 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492462311558 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 631.8 705.55239521 90% => 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: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.937267138 57.8364921388 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.625 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.875 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.75 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.232146119671 0.218282227539 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0844537598157 0.0743258471296 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0537219948045 0.0701772020484 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138993880039 0.128457276422 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0256224195819 0.0628817314937 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.