Restoration of old buildings in main cities involves enormous government expenditure. It would be more beneficial to spend this money to build new houses and roads. To what extent do you agree and disagree? Give reasons for your answer and include examples from your own experience.
Following the increase of argument of investing an amount of money on old structures, the issue has been getting debatable tactic among the world inhabitants. Some sets of people claim that spending amounts of national begets to repair and to maintain old-fashioned buildings are extremely prohibitively expenses, however, detractors share an opposite idea that the architectures should be remained rather than setting other houses and infrastructures. In my own perspective, I side with the later opinions and I will explain the feasible reasons why I support this view.
First and foremost, as far as the value of structures in metropolitan areas is considered, they were built in considerable earlier spans, they become certainly worth in terms of culture and inspiration as well as beliefs. They have made an important contribution to thicken history of a country. Besides, its myths and folklore also inspire and make professional citizens such as scientist and archaeologist to discover related mysterious stories. For example, through pyramids, we still research the reasons why they built and how moved those heavy stones. Additionally, with respect to the perspectives of governments, those historical buildings are concrete evidences to prove the existence of any reign in unspecified spans and it is likely used for educational materials for the next generations who want to have deeper insights into historical legends of the country.
Another reason worth mentioning is that those historical constructions can attract loads of travelers and become tourist attractions. This plays a pivotal role to increasing national budgets and have economically significant effects on economy through tourism. More specifically, take an example, the collected funds through an abundance of tourists can be used to invest to other sectors or grant for residents who live in poverty. In this regard, expenditures on the old structures seems affordable and feasible that future values.
In conclusion, people who priorities the practical and immediate values than potential ones can disagree with the idea to preserve those old constructions. On the contrary, I strongly believe that those buildings should remain by the tax, considering not only economic but also educational assets. As a results, the government should allocate the budget to protect those value assets.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 573, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...asible reasons why I support this view. First and foremost, as far as the value ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 302, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a result' or simply 'results'?
Suggestion: a result; results
...conomic but also educational assets. As a results, the government should allocate the bud...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 386, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e budget to protect those value assets.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, so, still, well, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, on the contrary, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2011.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 362.0 315.596192385 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.55524861878 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11213194143 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621546961326 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 630.0 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.7029459395 49.4020404114 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.066666667 106.682146367 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1333333333 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0666666667 7.06120827912 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.135303972285 0.244688304435 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0401674993871 0.084324248473 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0282372054969 0.0667982634062 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0786473118647 0.151304729494 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0249963427508 0.056905535591 44% => 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: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.26 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.06 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => 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.