The restoration of old buildings in main cities involves enormous government expenditure. It would be more beneficial to spend this money on building new houses and roads.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
In this day and age, opposing ideas have been put forward regarding whether to invest government funds in preserving age-old constructions or not. This essay aims to discover both given standpoints and sheds light on why I firmly advocate the idea of restoring ancient buildings, as long as moderation is in place.
On the one hand, proponents of conserving old buildings often emphasize the historical and cultural values that those constructions indicate. Architectures with ancient style capture an aspect of history as it represents the cultural traits of their country at the time. Therefore, people might stick to the idea that spending money on refurbishing antique structures is a superior way to display their appreciation for the national heritage. Furthermore, it is also contended that when these historical structures are well-restored, they can partly encourage the thriving of the national economy. This is because as soon as the quality of those traditional buildings is secured and continually upgraded, they would stand out to be symbolic and appeal to a host of tourists.
On the other hand, opponents of this approach argue that people can reap many potential benefits if the government allocates their expenditure to constructing more houses and enhancing the road system quality. Recently, with populations booming at a considerable rate, it is irrefutable that numerous metropolises require more and more houses to cater the human demand. Also, due to this population growth, traffic congestion or even the deterioration of road systems is gaining traction. Consequently, advocates of erecting more residences and traffic systems expect the government to spend money solving those problems in place of refurbishing old buildings.
Nevertheless, this is my view that as long as the spending is put into a specific limitation, restoring ancient structures is generally beneficial, given the cultural and educational significance. For example, many activities related to historical education are usually organized in those traditional places, resulting in a much better result.
In conclusion, I believe that both arguments have their own merits. On balance, however, I am utterly convinced that within a particular expenditure, these old buildings are still worth being renovated frequently.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, regarding, so, still, therefore, well, for example, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1975.0 1615.20841683 122% => OK
No of words: 352.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.61079545455 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33147354134 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16351140811 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59375 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 620.1 506.74238477 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.6056573142 49.4020404114 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.666666667 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4666666667 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.6 7.06120827912 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240484221907 0.244688304435 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.068002665291 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0441294567153 0.0667982634062 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112260742165 0.151304729494 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0387950859162 0.056905535591 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.07 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 78.4519038076 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => 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.