Q5: 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 that the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
Recently, the question of how to spend public money has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that improving current public transport should take precedence over constructing faster railway lines, while others argue otherwise. Personally, I wholeheartedly agree with the former stand. In the following essay, both views will be discussed before a conclusion is reached with my opinion.
On the one hand, those who claim that the construction of a new railway system should be a priority do so for several reasons. Proponents of this argument insist that the advent of new train lines for bullet trains can facilitate the cross-country transport of goods and passengers. To be more specific, not only can people see their relatives living other parts of the country with greater ease, but parcels are also able to be delivered more quickly. In addition, there might be a boom in domestic tourism, stimulating economic growth in regional areas.
My opinion, however, is that more emphasis should be placed on ameliorating existing public transport rather than establishing new railway lines. Perhaps the most compelling reason is that current public transport systems have a predisposition to play a more significant role in individuals' daily life given that a large number of citizens make use of existing public transport on a regular basis in order to commute to and from work or school. Thus, enhancing current transport systems makes it possible for the public to have an improved standard of living. Furthermore, setting up facilities related to new railway lines for bullet trains place a heavy financial burden on the government. To exemplify, a recent study conducted by the government of China has demonstrated that the amount of tax money spent on constructing new bullet train lines is anticipated three times higher than on renovating current transport systems. In light of the above, I find these more persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that updating current public transport should take priority over the introduction of fast railway lines for the reasons discussed above.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 314, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...le in individuals daily life given that a large number of citizens make use of existing public tr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, I fully support the view that updating...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, so, thus, while, in addition, in conclusion
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 : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1904.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 361.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27423822715 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35889894354 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85425577649 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 176.041082164 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590027700831 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 592.2 506.74238477 117% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.1294771829 49.4020404114 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.0 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5625 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06120827912 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.378503088848 0.244688304435 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102898434484 0.084324248473 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0665431738358 0.0667982634062 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.20750848652 0.151304729494 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0471404814946 0.056905535591 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.4159519038 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.