Some people tell that to reduce traffic and pollution, government should increase the tax on the petrol (gasoline).
Would there is more benefits than the drawback?
The increment in fuel prices by the authorities is considered as the best solution to control traffic and pollution, which is a nightmare in almost all cities, according to a few people. In my opinion, although it is advantageous to a certain extent, it can have more detrimental impact on common public than its benefits.
To begin with, it is quite obvious that if the fuel price is raised by imposing high duties on it, fewer people will use it. Due to reduction in users, not only the traffic problem will be solved but also it reduces poisonous smoke, which is mainly emitted by vehicles on the road. For instance, India has the highest Tax on petrol and thus the lowest car users. So high-cost fuel may discourage the extensive automobile use.
However, its applications are limited as it targets only the one aspect of a problem. Most of the car-goers are rich and wealthy enough to afford the hiked price which means the number of cars on the street will be consistent. Moreover, it simply puts financial pressure on common people who are already struggling with enormous inflation rate, which has made living a hell. Thus, high-priced propellant is inefficient solution.
The most effective way is to educate people about the deteriorating impact of their irresponsible action on the nature. People should be encouraged to use public transport on their daily commute, which is the major reason for car use. In addition, authorities should improve the quality of public buses, which is pathetic at the moment, to attract more users. Consequently, vehicles on the street will be decreased eventually so will be the pollution and traffic.
In Conclusion, high tax duties will simply increase the burden on middle class population, who are in the majority, rather than creating a huge impact. Therefore, government should invest more on other promising approaches, such as awareness campaign.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, thus, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion, 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: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1595.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 315.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06349206349 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78085815597 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590476190476 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 497.7 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.7614639364 49.4020404114 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.6875 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6875 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5625 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.15971114369 0.244688304435 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0469697003569 0.084324248473 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0362419635212 0.0667982634062 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0892367077552 0.151304729494 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0451017149271 0.056905535591 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.0946893788 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.4159519038 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.