When governments confront decision making situations in order to bring the most benefits to community, many things they should concern including the plans, costs, and outcomes. In a given situation, governments should project with a given budget to develop on either railroads or roads. This essay will discuss why investment in railways will be more efficient than roads in economic and social perspectives.
On one hand, approaching with an economic perspective to the project of building railroads will bring more benefits to society. In respects of multiplier effects, the amount of investment in a project proposed by a government will bring much more output than its input. For example, if 100 million dollars were invested on railways, it will eventually create jobs in planning and construction, then, transportation services. Which the government can get returns from of the projects by imposing personal income taxes and value-added taxes on the raw materials and services. Not to mention, the community will have bigger cashflow near the construction areas such as restaurants and accommodations. Therefore, governments are possible to seek potential incomes than the budget spends on the project.
On the other hand, in a social aspect toward the project on roads, there are many factors driving the limitations of investments in roads. It is commonly known as the uniqueness of the geographical characteristic of Australia, which is low population but broaden distribution, people rather take public transportations such as flights and trains rather than driving vehicles for 6 hours. According to the Australian Bureau of statistics, only 15% of roads tend to have traffic jams and which are in urban areas. Moreover, driving vehicles are a danger at night due to nocturnal wild animals such as kangaroos and koalas. For instance, the rate of roadkill in Australia is much higher than any other countries, which exposure the dangerous of driving in Australia. However, if the railroads are built, then people will rather use the trains rather than driving own vehicles.
In conclusion, it is obvious that governments to spend the budget on railroads than roads are more efficient. For both economic and social potential advantages are predicted much more efficiently by the project on railroads, rather than the project on roads. Therefore, governments must concern the outputs as mentioned above to make a better decision for the community.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 24.0651302605 29% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2081.0 1615.20841683 129% => OK
No of words: 386.0 315.596192385 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.39119170984 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99929855689 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536269430052 0.561755894193 95% => OK
syllable_count: 613.8 506.74238477 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.621761398 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.611111111 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4444444444 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184945082734 0.244688304435 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0613847565552 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0476230836875 0.0667982634062 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124009026736 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0373632019391 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.