in a numbers of countries some people think it is necessary to speed large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities other believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport
discuss both views and give your own answer
People have different view about whether building new rails road should be prioritized compared to reconstructing existing public transportation services or not. While there are some benefits to improving, I believe that new construction is usually more productively.
On one hand, there are several principal reasons why existing public transportation should be improved. First of all, it is an irrefutable fact that if the constructions become old, they lose their efficiency; therefore, they should be repaired, and some budget should be allocated for maintaining them. Secondly and even more importantly, though, some money should be spent on improvement of condition in public services. For instance, adding air condition or more comfortable seats. One particularly salient example of this is buses and taxis in my city, Arak. Nowadays most of buses and taxis enjoy high level of facilities, and have air condition and cooling systems that make passengers feel calm and enjoy their commutes. Finally, it is obvious that the cost of maintenance is always much less than the cost of constructing new structures.
On other hand, it is perhaps even more important to build new rail lines between cities. One point which I believe absolutely pivotal is the fact that the rate of casualty is high, and annually, the vast numbers of people lose their lives or become handicapped and should be confined to a wheelchair for rest of their lives. Hence, trains between cities improve not only speed but also safety. Further, traveling based on road imposes a huge cost for both individuals and governments since repairing both car and road cost fortune. Therefore, it is reasonable to surmise that providing more security at reasonable prize, high-speed trains are indispensable.
By way of conclusion, although I can understand why improving existing forms of transportation is biotic, it seems to me that reallocating funds to construct new railways is more desirable.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-20 | MinyiChu | 67 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 67 | view |
| 2023-12-30 | Tường Vân | 73 | view |
- the chart below give information on the ages of the population of Yemen and Italy in 2000 and projections for 2050. 61
- Some people believe that allowing children to make their own choices on everyday matters ( such as food, clothes, and entertainment) is likely to result in a society of individuals who only think about their own wishes. Other people believe that it is imp 61
- The chart shows how frequently people in the USA ate fast food in restaurants between 2003 and 2013. 78
- The graph shows the proportion of the population aged 65 and over between 1940 and 2040 in three different countries. 78
- the plans below show the layout of a university sports center now, and how it will look after redevelopment 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 573, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the buses') or simply say ''most buses''.
Suggestion: most of the buses; most buses
...es and taxis in my city, Arak. Nowadays most of buses and taxis enjoy high level of facilitie...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1659.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 311.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33440514469 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02740248169 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59807073955 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.1951217094 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.6 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7333333333 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.93333333333 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => 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: 0.322076402698 0.244688304435 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0961239679137 0.084324248473 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0631630959728 0.0667982634062 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177616173331 0.151304729494 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0413495562034 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.