Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads.
It is thought by some people that for governments, spending money on railway lines will be better than spending money on roads. I totally agree with this statement and I think that trains should be used more than motor vehicles.
In todays world, transportation is one of the most crucial activity and most people use different kind of modes of transportation, such as personal cars, public transports, trains, frequently. Consequently, governments should take action in order to improve transportation and they should do this by paying more attention on railways instead of roads since trains are more environmental-friendly vehicles. For instance, improvement of existing railways or construction of new ones will increase the usage of trains significantly and reduce traffic congestion caused by motor vehicles. As a result, reduced traffic jam will also reduce carbon dioxide emissions, which is mostly caused by personal cars, and greenhouse gas effects will decline significantly.
Furthermore, another important reason why construction of railways should be paid more than roads is that trains are safer than motor vehicles. There are plenty of vehicles like cars and public transporters travelling on road, while there will be only one train passing on a railway line. This will grow the probability of a crash on roads compared to railway lines. To illustrate, according to a report which was published in 2017, people who died because of car crashes was much higher than those who died due to the trains. Therefore, governments should consider twice if they consider spending money on motor vehicle roads rather than railways.
In conclusion, there are several reasons to agree with the idea of spending money on railway lines rather than roads for governments. Thus, I totally agree with the idea of the statement given.
- The growing number of overweight people is putting a strain on the health care system in an effort to deal with the health issues involved Some people think that the best way to deal with this problem is to introduce more physical education lessons in the 87
- The plans below show the layout of a university s sports centre now and how it will look after redevelopment 83
- The chart below shows how frequently people in the USA ate in fast food restaurants between 2003 and 2013 73
- The graph below shows the consumption of 3 spreads from 1981 to 2007 73
- Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, furthermore, if, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, i think, in conclusion, kind of, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1552.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 291.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.33333333333 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02641660363 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.539518900344 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 461.7 506.74238477 91% => 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: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.4144108591 49.4020404114 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.384615385 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3846153846 20.7667163134 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1538461538 7.06120827912 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.358914131829 0.244688304435 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131051821413 0.084324248473 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.135285065537 0.0667982634062 203% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.238235619257 0.151304729494 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101691003838 0.056905535591 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.0946893788 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.58950901804 95% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 78.4519038076 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.