Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The government should spend more money on improving access to the Internet than on public transportation.
Without a shadow of a doubt, having appropriate public transportation and an improved internet are two crucial principles of modern life. Governments spend a huge sum of money on improving both public transportation and the Internet. An unanswered question in this area is whether spending money for which one is better. I, in contrast to some people, who agree with the improvement of a public transportation, believe that the government should spend more money to improve the Internet. I feel this way for some reason. In the following paragraphs, I will illustrate my viewpoint.
First and foremost, the invention of the Internet has changed life for the better one, and the improvement of the Internet would also increase the welfare of life. In the modern era, in which people could stay home and do their tasks via the Internet, it is important to mention that, consequently, it could decrease the traffic in the city. Global warming, which is caused by the increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, is mostly due to the intense use of vehicles. Therefore, the government could easily decrease the condense of traffic by improving of the Internet and remote-works. This is why I think the Internet is more important than public transportation.
Second, if people could have access to the Internet better than before, they can stay home and enjoy their life, meanwhile their working at home. My personal experience is a compelling example of this. In the pandemic situation, due to the COVID-19, everybody has obligated to stay home and be safe. In this regard, our city government has stated that “we are going to improve the internet, and encourage people to stay home and perform their works at home using the internet.” Therefore, when people realized that they could access an improved internet, they stayed home and adhered to the rules of the pandemic. In the quarantine, I figured out that by being home and working in my home office, I can save more time, which could be used for entertainment, such as; reading books, watching movies, and so on. On the other hand, the online-shipping let me not go out, be in a traffic jam, not use my car, not spend money on petrol, and, consequently, save more time. This example could illustrate the importance of the improvement of the Internet.
In conclusion, I strongly agree with the idea of spending much more money on improving the Internet rather than public transportation. This is because it directly facilitates people’s lives and indirectly influences global warming, and because of saving more time for individuals.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 524, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...e, the government could easily decrease the condense of traffic by improving of the Internet...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, if, second, so, therefore, while, i feel, i think, in conclusion, in contrast, such as, in contrast to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.0752688172 223% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2173.0 1977.66487455 110% => OK
No of words: 431.0 407.700716846 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04176334107 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94889293673 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 212.727598566 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475638051044 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 676.8 618.680645161 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 9.59856630824 146% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.1265081614 48.9658058833 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.65 100.406767564 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.55 20.6045352989 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.4 5.45110844103 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 11.8709677419 152% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.85842293907 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.338030651586 0.236089414692 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116692803704 0.076458572812 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.127027506318 0.0737576698707 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.237758666077 0.150856017488 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105702498967 0.0645574589148 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 11.7677419355 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.01818996416 101% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 86.8835125448 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.