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.
Nowadays, in many countries, people think that the governments should affordable constructing and improving means of transport as a priority in their planning and budgeting. While there are persuasive arguments in favour of investing funds on building modern railways, I would argue that it is better to improve the old-fashioned infrastructures of public transport.
On the one hand, some people believe that the construction of the advanced railway lines is of paramount importance. To begin with, such facilities have the potential to provide individuals with fastest and the most convenient way to reach their destinations. Consequently, one can consume without being concern about time, since fast trains can save their time. Furthermore, cutting-edge train technologies are always among safest mode of transport between cities compared to the other vehicles, for example, airplanes and cars. Therefore, citizens are apparently more likely to put their faith on trains. Finally, as a result of population explosion, there is always demand for high-capacity means of transport. Inevitably, the necessity of such vehicles cannot be ignored.
On the other hand, many people express that if the budget is spent on the current transportation infrastructures, it could be far more beneficial. First and foremost, they claim that out-dated public transport can pose a threat to the environment and also human well-being. Thus, it should be improved and, in turn, reduce the amount of damage it can cause. Secondly, as a result of aesthetic reasons, trains are constantly criticised. For instance, a sizeable number of trees should be felled so as to construct railway lines between cities. As a result, deforestation is inevitable.
By and large, notwithstanding the fact that construction of leading-edge railway lines would be beneficial, I am of the opinion that it is better that the wealth to be poured into the improvement of old-fashioned public transportation. Owing to aesthetical and environmental reasons.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 420, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'among the safest'.
Suggestion: among the safest
...ting-edge train technologies are always among safest mode of transport between cities compar...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 495, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...zeable number of trees should be felled so as to construct railway lines between cities....
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, while, as to, for example, for instance, as a result, by and large, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1715.0 1615.20841683 106% => OK
No of words: 309.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.5501618123 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30205896148 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595469255663 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 519.3 506.74238477 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.6480637715 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.882352941 106.682146367 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1764705882 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.3529411765 7.06120827912 175% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.305436082828 0.244688304435 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0814381208928 0.084324248473 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0747639175981 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172265358459 0.151304729494 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0420853493716 0.056905535591 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.61 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.