In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
People often argue about the investment of money on improving the traffic systems. While some people believe that governments should allocate a vast amount of money on building new railway lines for high-speed trains between cities, others think developing available public transport is a better choice. This essay aims to discuss both views before presenting my own opinion.
On the one hand, there are two major reasons why people trust that the construction of novel railway lines for fast trains between cities should be invested. Firstly, such trains may help to save commuting time because of its high speed. This is obviously attractive to many citizens, especially those whose accommodation is distant from their workplaces, or those who ambitious to expand their businesses to other cities. Secondly, as trains are well-known for their abilities to contain a huge number of passengers, their appearance could be the solution to traffic congestion. Specifically, it can significantly reduce the number of people traveling by their private cars; and therefore, the frequency of traffic jams may be dramatically declined.
On the other hand, others have a belief that such an amount of money should be allocated to upgrade the existing public transport because of its accessibility and convenience. This is to say that the available public modes of transport tend to be more approachable and convenient for both long and short traveling distances, while trains are more suitable for long journeys. Typical evidence for this is the distance between two bus stations is much nearer than that between two railway stations. Also, the available means of public transport are familiar with most populations as they have been used for a long time. Accordingly, inhabitants would certainly prefer using public transports to the new high-speed trains for their daily commute routine. As a result, if authorities spend national budgets on upgrading and developing the public transports facilities and infrastructure, citizens would be encouraged to use such transports more frequently.
In conclusion, the reasons for each point of view can be easily identified. However, from my perspective, it seems to me that allocating money for the development of existing public transport is a more efficient and sustainable option compared to building a new railway line.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1998.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 369.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41463414634 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93008952212 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547425474255 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 608.4 506.74238477 120% => 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: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.717256632 49.4020404114 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.875 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0625 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06120827912 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => 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: 0.393016895295 0.244688304435 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11955505698 0.084324248473 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0883316422302 0.0667982634062 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236620408077 0.151304729494 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0756837548499 0.056905535591 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.