Some people think it is more important to spend public money on roads and motorways than on public transport system such as railways and trams. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is often argued that more funds should be allocated for infrastructural developments such as roads and motorways than enhancing the public transportation systems such as railways or trams. I feel, infrastructure is important but not by compromising funds assigned to public transport system. The following paragraphs will illustrate the merits of this position.
Firstly, better quality of roads would increase the levels of safety and easy traffic congestions in mega cities. This can result in lowering the mortality or injury rates. Furthermore, spending on road repair or widening the exiting roads can create safer travel modes for commuters and offer free-flow traffic solutions during peak hours. For instance, the road repairs prior to winter are critical in reducing accidents during ice rain days. Hence, spending money on road networks gains support of many people.
However, I would argue that spending on public transport is a better investment for several reasons. Compared to vehicles, high-capacity public transit modes can accommodate a larger number of passengers at a time. Australia is a classic example of integrated public transport networks. A recent report indicates that each train on Sydney’s railways removes approximately 980 cars from its roads. Therefore, a modal shift from private to public transport would tremendously alleviate urban congestion, a bottleneck in big cities. Furthermore, efficient public transport systems are a contributor to a cleaner environment, and it is pivotal in reducing carbon emissions.
In conclusion, both modes of transport will contribute to coexist in our rapidly growing economies. However, based on the above-mentioned arguments, I acquiesce in the view that public money should be invested in more on public transport systems as it directly mitigates the effect of climate change by reducing the carbon foot prints rather than using road networks.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, so, therefore, for instance, i feel, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1635.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 292.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.59931506849 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0540169629 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.041082164 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602739726027 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 496.8 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.5563632712 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.1875 106.682146367 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.25 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0625 7.06120827912 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.328051272293 0.244688304435 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0984986783326 0.084324248473 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0849002405337 0.0667982634062 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199476366338 0.151304729494 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0748165545535 0.056905535591 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.2 12.4159519038 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.83 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 78.4519038076 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.