There is a debate whether country should use money on building new rapid train railway lines or bettering current public transportation. I completely agree with the latter view because of several reasons.
On the one hand, rapid train is advantageous in overcoming traffic congestion problem. This is because rapid train has swift speed and operates in special railway lines which makes its passengers to arrive earlier than before. Therefore, spending money on building new rapid train railway lines will support more rapid trains to operate. The more rapid trains that operate, the less traffic congestion will occur. However, rapid train has expensive fare which will make people to be reluctant to switch from their private vehicles. Finally, traffic congestion problem will not be overcome by the existence of more rapid trains.
On the other hand, public transportation also has potential in overcoming traffic jam problem. By bettering current public transportation, people will feel more comfortable and safe in riding them. Moreover, it has affordable fare which will increase the probability for people to switch from their personal transportation. Thus, spending money for improving public transportation will help overcoming traffic congestion problem.
In conclusion, using money for constructing new rapid train railways is good because rapid train is good in overcoming traffic jam problem. However, because it has expensive fare which makes people reluctant to switch from their private vehicles, I completely agree that it is better to spend the money for bettering current public transportation which have more affordable fares.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 392, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to overcome' or 'overcome'.
Suggestion: to overcome; overcome
...proving public transportation will help overcoming traffic congestion problem. In concl...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 41.998997996 62% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1406.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 250.0 315.596192385 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.624 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83905336336 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 117.0 176.041082164 66% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.468 0.561755894193 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 423.9 506.74238477 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.6847010307 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.428571429 106.682146367 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8571428571 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => 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: 0.229391899596 0.244688304435 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0970049978232 0.084324248473 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0720804500818 0.0667982634062 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.169318827909 0.151304729494 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0255543310313 0.056905535591 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.02 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.58950901804 90% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 78.4519038076 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.