The best way to solve the traffic congestion in city is to provide free public transport for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Nowadays, heavy traffic congestion has become a challenging problem in many cities. Some people argue that free public transport service should be provided to tackle this problem. In my opinion, free public transport is certainly a great idea, but it is not viable way to ease traffic congestion.
It is true that round the clock free public transport can reduce the occurrence of traffic congestion because in most cases traffic issues are caused by the presence of a large number of private vehicles on the road. If public transport services are provided free of cost and their frequency is increased, few people will want to drive their personal vehicles. This will theoretically reduce the number of cars on the roads and ease traffic congestion.
On the flip side, when there are too many takers for the free public transport, buses and trains will become overcrowded. This will make the journey uncomfortable and many people will have to stand all the way. As a result, affluent commuters will choose not to use public transport. Instead, they will drive their own car to work and the traffic situation will get worse again. Another disadvantage of providing free public transport is that it is a huge burden on the government and as such it is not a viable idea in the long term.
Personally I feel that instead of proving free public transport, the government should try to improve the frequency and reliability of buses and trains. It should also build wider roads and more flyovers. If people can ride comfortably on a bus or a train and still reach their destination on time, they will definitely consider that option. Hence, instead of making public transport a free service, what the government needs to do is to improve it. In addition, the government needs to ensure that the cost of traveling by a bus or train is always less than the cost of driving one’s own vehicle.
To conclude, free public transport might seem to be a great way to tackle traffic congestion, but in my opinion, it is not a practical solution to this problem. A better option is to enhance the quality of public transport and subsidise its cost.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 170, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ic issues are caused by the presence of a large number of private vehicles on the road. If public...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, so, still, i feel, in addition, as a result, in most cases, in my opinion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 7.85571142285 191% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1783.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 368.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84510869565 5.12529762239 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65422091131 2.80592935109 95% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.48097826087 0.561755894193 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 539.1 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.2868919176 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.0555555556 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4444444444 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.94444444444 7.06120827912 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.22726577565 0.244688304435 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0833588925342 0.084324248473 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0559046289157 0.0667982634062 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148600976118 0.151304729494 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360923425329 0.056905535591 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.0946893788 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 50.2224549098 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.4159519038 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 8.58950901804 88% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 78.4519038076 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.