Some people believe government should spend money on building train and subway lines to reduce traffic congestion. Others think that building more and wider roads is the better way to reduce traffic congestion. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
In order to tackle the problem of traffic jam, some people suggest that national budget should be invested in building railroad of all kinds, while others argue that it is the infrastructure for vehicles that we should focus on. In my opinion, although I fully understand why people support the latter view, the former one seems more reasonable to me.
The fact that road transport is the most popular means of transport nowadays explain why a large number of people believe that the increase of both quality and quantities of roads is the most logical solution. From their point of view, the traffic congestion in large cities is a result of poor urban planning that gives not wide enough streets with too few lanes. Therefore, a simple solution yet effective is that taxpayer's money should be used in traffic infrastructure reform programs, which must sufficiently provide expanded inner-city paths for residents as a result. By doing this, it will give enough space for all types of vehicles… to circulate swiftly and then there will be fewer gridlocks during rush hours, which in turn can save a lot of time and cost for fuel. Another point to be made is that a high-quality street with an adequate supply of signs, parking lots and no pothole will likely cause less traffic accidents, which can make all moving vehicles stuck in one place, thus create a traffic jam.
Nevertheless, I still stand with those who believe railroads and subway lines are the key to thoroughly address this chronic problem of all large metropolis around the world. This is due to the fact that this type of transport is clearly superior to its road counterpart in terms of speed and capacity, since they can carry more people, goods and even smaller vehicles. Consequently, more trains and locomotives will slash the number of cars, buses, trucks, etc., moving on the street and thus, thoroughly solve the congestion problem. Another reason to be given is that rail transportation system is independent from other systems or, sometimes, outside crowded city areas, and this relieves the density of passengers on public vehicles, hence reducing congestion caused by other means of transportation.
In conclusion, despite acknowledging why people think having roadways widened can tackle congested roads, I hold the belief that government should allocate financial resources to producing more trains and railways.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 90, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...means of transport nowadays explain why a large number of people believe that the increase of bot...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 417, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'taxpayers'' or 'taxpayer's'?
Suggestion: taxpayers'; taxpayer's
...a simple solution yet effective is that taxpayers money should be used in traffic infrast...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, hence, if, nevertheless, so, still, then, therefore, thus, while, in conclusion, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2013.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 393.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12213740458 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69704498084 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 176.041082164 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610687022901 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 598.5 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 32.0 20.2975951904 158% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 38.328622899 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 167.75 106.682146367 157% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.75 20.7667163134 158% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0833333333 7.06120827912 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
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: 0.215068586989 0.244688304435 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0708282025231 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0367404451537 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125781236952 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0361858071859 0.056905535591 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 13.0946893788 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.46 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.01 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.1190380762 146% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.