Government should spend money on railways rather than roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Some experts consider the government’s budget should be allocated more railways development and less priority on roads. This issue is debatable topic in which some experts agree with and other against with.
Those views who support the notion of spending money on railway have two main significant reasons. Firstly, they consider that railways is more efficient than usual transportation such bus, car, and vehicle which is the trains can grab more passenger in its single trip. The advanced countries in the globe are the appropriate specimen for this type transportation, which is any people can find it with friendly service. Second of all, the railway is more convenience with the high-accurate schedule and high-safety provision. This reason is most acceptable for many country to reduce the traffic jam and provide the more expected time transportation.
Regarding expert against this issue, they take some considerations. One of them is, the roads provide more flexible movement to any location. The people can achieve the specific area which is located far from the city center. Second of all, the larger capacity of roads give a huge impact on economic growth, where the industrial climate will be more dynamic by transferring product in easy way. The best specimen to demonstrate it, is China Economy, which build roads to connect any place throughout the country. The last reason, the more accessable road will increase the household preference to buy cars and vehicles. Perhaps, in the economic side will increase the country’s income.
Based on the two-side reasons, I slightly disagree with this notion and supporting government to spend more money to build the roads, because it more reasonable for people rather than railways.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 77, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'railways'' or 'railway's'?
Suggestion: railways'; railway's
...'s budget should be allocated more railways development and less priority on roads....
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 551, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ry. The last reason, the more accessable road will increase the household prefere...
^^
Line 7, column 195, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onable for people rather than railways.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, regarding, second, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1484.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 278.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3381294964 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86244157343 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.618705035971 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.1758504235 49.4020404114 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.9333333333 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5333333333 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.73333333333 7.06120827912 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192175653387 0.244688304435 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0613720053607 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0741806074797 0.0667982634062 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151691499183 0.151304729494 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0946544508237 0.056905535591 166% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 78.4519038076 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.