Traffic and housing problems in major cities could be solved by moving companies, factories and their employees to the countryside. Do you agree or disagree?
It is argued that the relocation of major corporations from urban to rural areas is an effective method to tackle the problems of traffic congestion and housing shortage. While this policy is good in some ways, I believe there are other initiatives which should be implemented to solve
the above-mentioned concerns.
To begin with, it is a good idea to move businesses and their employees to the countryside to ease traffic congestion and housing scarcity. Firstly, if people are encouraged to relocate to suburban regions, the population density in major cities could be greatly alleviated. As a result, the number of privately owned vehicles can be significantly reduced, helping to calm congested conditions. Furthermore, when fewer people live in big cities, there will be more spaces to build new residential areas with recreation complexes, and thus life quality in large cities can be enhanced and the pressure on housing supply can be relieved.
However, I would argue more effective strategies should be concurrently employed to resolve urban traffic and housing problems. The first one is to develop well-designed road infrastructure to make it more convenient for commuters. For example, bigger roads or highways should be built to keep up with the increasing volume of private and public transport on the street. Consequently, traffic congestion can be lessened. Another solution is that the government should encourage investors to run numerous residential projects in urban centers such as high-rise apartments or massive skyscrapers to accommodate the annual population increase, and therefore housing shortages will no longer be a problem in the long run.
In conclusion, apart from relocating businesses to the countryside, I agree there are other feasible approaches to deal with traffic and housing-related issues.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, thus, well, while, apart from, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 24.0651302605 42% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1555.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47535211268 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14788535463 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609154929577 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 491.4 506.74238477 97% => 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: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => 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: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.7787426289 49.4020404114 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.583333333 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.75 7.06120827912 195% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => 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: 0.265787118342 0.244688304435 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0931899945857 0.084324248473 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059852209265 0.0667982634062 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119221970456 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0767474073138 0.056905535591 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.4159519038 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.28 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.