In a number of countries some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Other believe the money should be spend on improving existing public transport. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
People have different views about how government should spend maximum expenses on public transportation. I believe that this expenditure should be used up for better public transmit in cities.
On the one hand, the advancement of technology has been increasing the need for convenient transportation in short notice in many countries. By renovating or building a modern railway network with high-speed train, most cities will be interacted in an effective way in terms of facilitate each other for premier developments. What’s more, there are lots of cities with various potential attributes such as port cities or industrial ones which would be able to cooperate and import products easily. Consequently, as far as employment opportunities has concerned, with a perfect transition, more individuals are likely to be satisfied to work at an unreasonable distance. In fact, the pace of life and efficiency, in balance, would be greater in each community.
On the other hand, I would argue that a suitable daily commuting is enormously effective in various aspects. Firstly, increasing urban population have led to corresponding increase in the number of vehicles on the streets, resulting in rising congestion in city centers. As a result, by facilitating public and limiting private cars the traffic jam would be regulated as far as possible. Secondly, it is often the case that poor public transport lead to detrimental issues like air pollution. Thus, people will not be encouraged to utilize public transmit, unless governments apply better public facilities as a potential solution which cause less pollution spontaneously. Finally, running efficient systems not only does the consumption of fossil fuels reduce, it definitely affects the time consuming by being in long-term traffic or out of date public transport services.
In conclusion, I accept the first view why people might more agree with spending money on modern railways for high-speed trains, but it seems to me that better public transportation is much more desirable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 247, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an effective way" with adverb for "effective"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...d train, most cities will be interacted in an effective way in terms of facilitate each other for p...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, thus, in conclusion, in fact, in short, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1735.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 318.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45597484277 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12176100882 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.635220125786 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 532.8 506.74238477 105% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => 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: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.8841693828 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.928571429 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7142857143 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6428571429 7.06120827912 151% => 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 : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21025360013 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0679595139588 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0516599855813 0.0667982634062 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141459100129 0.151304729494 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0504685538765 0.056905535591 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.