Governments should spend more money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
Since time immemorial, people try to find the most effective way for transferring goods as well as for travelling. Some of them prefer to use railways, another find more advantages by car driving. Whilst, I believe that there are strong arguments on both sides, I would suggest that it is more beneficial for national authorities to invest in railways building.
Nobody can deny that spending money on roads is more profitable for government. First, all materials, which are necessary for such building, are usually cheaper to purchase than, for example, to buy rails or trains. It also should be noticed that during next five or ten years authorities could spend less money on roads reconstruction or repair. Moreover, the speed of the roads building is the factor of utmost importance. Due to the spending less time for the road creation, government, for example, can efficiently deliver all necessity goods and help to the citizens who suffer from earthquake or storm.
Turning to the other side of argument, railways continue to show their potential in developed countries. Modern trains, which are used only electricity, have a positive impact on our environment. Japan is the best example of how rational using of railways helps government to develop all areas of the country. New trains could be used by more than thousands people per hour, which allow workers to drive to their factories and offices at any part of the country. Despite the fact that the newest train’s speed is about 600 km per hour, Japanese railways are safety and very convenient.
To conclude, both railways and roads have advantages and disadvantages for counties. However, I strongly believe that if the governments have enough money they should invest in railways rather than in roads, because modern trains are more reliable and faster than cars or buses. In long term perspective national authorities will spend less on environment protection as well as on attracting labor in small cities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 316, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'roads'' or 'road's'?
Suggestion: roads'; road's
...s authorities could spend less money on roads reconstruction or repair. Moreover, the...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, moreover, so, well, as for, for example, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1665.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 324.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13888888889 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76978789183 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595679012346 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.6545381929 49.4020404114 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.0625 106.682146367 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.8125 7.06120827912 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.20326162335 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0635662917914 0.084324248473 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734390649121 0.0667982634062 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12622422065 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.075677314261 0.056905535591 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 50.2224549098 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.