In many places, new homes are needed, but the only space available for building them is in the countryside. Some people believe it is more important to protect the countryside and not build new homes there. What is your opinion about this?
The effectiveness of constructing new homes in the countryside is datable. It is often argued that it is compulsory to protect the land of the rural area rather than building news homes out there. I completely agree with the statement above and provide evidence as to why we should protect the landscape of the country, and its alternate solution caters to the need for homes in the city.
To begin with, there are various reasons why we should protect the countryside. The prime reason is that the beautiful landscape of the country would attract people from across the globe to visit because these days people would like to visit places where they could rewind the stress from daily routine while looking at the natural beauty. The influx of tourists would allow earning handsome revenue, and this will generate employment in different fields such as the hotel and transportation industry. A recent article suggests that the tourist industry in Switzerland is contributing 20% revenue in GDP, and the credit goes to their countryside as they didn’t destroy landscape; therefore, people love to visit the country every year. A final reason is to protect natural habitats. This could be achieved by preserving the environment where they would like to live. Therefore, building new homes in the countryside would lead to disaster for them which needs to be avoided.
However, there is an alternate option available to meet the high demand for houses. It is often claimed, for example, that the vertical expansion in the city is the prime solution to meet the demand. Besides, it will require less time and cost to construct a skyscraper in the city as it requires less land to pay for and the workforce would be readily available in the town rather than hiring manpower for the countryside. That’s why vertical expansion to solve the above-mentioned problem should not be neglected.
In conclusion, I am of the view that the countryside construction should be avoided as it increases tourism in the country and protects natural habitat, I presume highrise towers could be possible option to meet the housing demand in the country.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 248, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...meet the housing demand in the country.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, however, if, look, so, therefore, while, as to, for example, in conclusion, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1803.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 355.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07887323944 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7654110928 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.515492957746 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 554.4 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.4366537852 49.4020404114 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.2 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.46666666667 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.205781454259 0.244688304435 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0754028564789 0.084324248473 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0753126190829 0.0667982634062 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120190829248 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0763919972881 0.056905535591 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => 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: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.