Transport delays and long journey times are a widespread phenomenon in many cities today. What are the causes of this problem, and how could the situation be improved?
As technology develops, the nature of problems which people deal with them in the majority of cities, changes. Among these, transport delays and long-lasting journey are common and broad issues in metropolitans. The factors seem to stem from two main roots, and several possible solutions can be taken into account to address them. This essay deals with the underlying factors and introduces some remedies to ameliorate the stated matter.
It can not be denied that the cardinal cause of the problem might arise from the lack of investment for transportation infrastructure, meaning that as these foundations are becoming outdated, they might not work well and in some emergency cases, even they might stop from working. Therefore, more and more funding needs to be considered to fix and renew public services. Another widely observed root seems to be overcrowding. By this, I mean that today, large cities like Tehran in Iran witness conurbation and urban sprawls in which citizens are tackling with the widespread phenomenon, namely traffic congestion. This problem occurs during peak hours, and it is the main issue of bottlenecks in major cities.
Regarding potential solutions, the first and foremost remedy appears to encourage the public and private sector to subsidise public services to improve their situation. Probably, if they can take part in this subject and support each other, we will see a considerable improvement in services such as subway and bus. Moreover, this will enhance the public network system and fosters civic pride. Another program should perhaps be allocating tax incentives for people who choose to do remote working. In this case, the numbers of employees who commute to the workplace will definitely diminish, contributing to less traffic in rush hours. Furthermore, whereas implementing this method may be burdensome to authorities, individuals can try communal car-pooling to reduce the use of private cars.
In conclusion, although old infrastructure and overcrowding tend to be the key factors behind this problem, answers to the problem would range from better funding, working at home, and society member’s cooperation in using personal devices.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 794, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ling to reduce the use of private cars. In conclusion, although old infrastructu...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, therefore, well, whereas, i mean, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1859.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 342.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43567251462 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89793225489 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.657894736842 0.561755894193 117% => OK
syllable_count: 566.1 506.74238477 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6485493746 49.4020404114 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.1875 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.375 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.1875 7.06120827912 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.223398947062 0.244688304435 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0606136194117 0.084324248473 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0401430847758 0.0667982634062 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119214221441 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0356549473837 0.056905535591 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.0946893788 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.22 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => 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.