Two years ago the town of Seaside Vista opened a new municipal golf course and resort hotel Since then the Seaside Vista Tourism Board has reported a 20 increase in visitors In addition local banks reported a steep rise in the number of new business loan

Essay topics:

"Two years ago, the town of Seaside Vista opened a new municipal golf course and resort hotel. Since then, the Seaside Vista Tourism Board has reported a 20% increase in visitors. In addition, local banks reported a steep rise in the number of new business loan applications they received this year. The amount of tax money collected by Seaside Vista has also increased, allowing the town to announce plans to improve Seaside Vista's roads and bridges. We recommend building a similar golf course and resort hotel in Brindleburg. We predict that this project will generate additional tax revenue that the city can use to fund much-needed public improvements."

The author recommends that building a similar golf course and resort holel in Brindleburg and predicts that this project will generate additional tax revenue that the city can use to fund much-needed public improvements. To support the conclusion, he cites various evidences. Although these evidences appear to bolster the argument, a meticulous analysis will show otherwise. Thus, in order to make the argument more sound, the author needs to cite the following specific evidences.

First of all, the author presumes without evidence that Seaside Vista and Brindleburg are the place with similar characteristics. It is possible that these two cities are with completely different. If these two cities were different, building golf course and resort hotel in Brindleburg might be useless and it may significantly weaken the conclusion made by the writer. Even if the city Brindleburg and the Seaside Vista were of the same kind, it is possible that Brindleburg is considerably far from the city and most tourist doesn't want to travel that far. If either of these cases were true, then it substantially proves the author's recommendation unwarranted.

Second of all, the writer assumes that the Brindleburg has sufficient land area to build the golf course and resort hotel. Perhaps it has not enough land for these infrastructure. Even if there is sufficient land in Brindleburg, it is possible that the city Bringleburg is impecunious that cannot afford to build such infrastructure. It is also possible that, for the city Bringleburg, there are so many relatively very cheap alternative ideas to increase the Tourism. If this is the case, then the author's recommendation doesn't hold water.

Third of all, even if the tax is increased in Brindleburg by building golf course and resort hotel, it is possible that the tax accrued by Tourism is insufficient fund much-needed public improvements in Brindleburg. It is possible that the Brindleburg is in hilly reason and to build roads and bridges are very expensive. If this is the case, then the author's prediction cannot be fulfilled by his recommendation.

In conclusion, it is possible that the project will generate additional tax revenue that the city can use to fund much-needed public improvements in Brindleburg. However, as it stands now, the argument relies on three unfounded assumptions that rendered its conclusion unpersuasive at best and specious at worst. Thus, the author needs to provide the specific evidences regarding the similarity of the two cities, land mass of the cities, and the population distribution as well as the cost of building most needed infrastructure.

Votes
Average: 5.5 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 474, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...to cite the following specific evidences First of all the author presumes without...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 523, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ably far from the city and most tourist doesnt want to travel that far If either of th...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 622, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e true then it substantially proves the authors recommendation unwarranted Second o...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 656, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s the authors recommendation unwarranted Second of all the writer assumes that th...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 157, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this infrastructure' or 'these infrastructures'?
Suggestion: this infrastructure; these infrastructures
...otel Perhaps it has not enough land for these infrastructure Even if there is sufficient land in Bri...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 491, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...he Tourism If this is the case then the authors recommendation doesnt hold water Thi...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 514, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...he case then the authors recommendation doesnt hold water Third of all even if the ...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 347, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... expensive If this is the case then the authors prediction cannot be fulfilled by his r...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, regarding, second, so, then, third, thus, well, as to, in conclusion, as well as, first of all

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2184.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 421.0 441.139720559 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18764845606 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52971130743 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0065535886 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.410926365796 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 685.8 705.55239521 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 1.0 19.7664670659 5% => 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: 421.0 22.8473053892 1843% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 0.0 57.8364921388 0% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 2184.0 119.503703932 1828% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 421.0 23.324526521 1805% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 130.0 5.70786347227 2278% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 6.88822355289 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.107634947871 0.218282227539 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107634947871 0.0743258471296 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0701772020484 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0664908400385 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0351185213479 0.0628817314937 56% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 213.5 14.3799401198 1485% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -355.84 48.3550499002 -736% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 0.0 7.1628742515 0% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 167.5 12.197005988 1373% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 14.3 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 27.41 8.32208582834 329% => Dale chall readability score is high.
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 59.0 12.3882235529 476% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 170.4 11.1389221557 1530% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 214.0 11.9071856287 1797% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 423 350
No. of Characters: 2174 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.535 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.139 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.03 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 150 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.15 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.516 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.334 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.527 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.076 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5