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.
In such a civilized society, in spite of several disagreements people have in various areas so far as one’s view goes, one point that virtually everybody approves upon is the importance of government support in people’s lives. This is the mostly owing to the fact that people always have been expected some essential practical issues in order to have a comfortable life. With this in mind, a broad range of controversial attitudes might stimulate heated debates as to what kind of prominent support should be injected to the society from governments. Two sides often form in this regard. Those who trust that spending money to improve internet access is better, while others who think the improvement of public transportation is superior to the other choice. I personally consider myself among the latter group. Among the many reasons one can give for this opinion, two conspicuous reasons will be elaborated and investigated through ensuing lines.
One reason coming to mind at first is air pollution that has been a major crisis for every society in recent years. Needless to say that with population growth, the number of individual automobiles will increase dramatically and thus exhausted toxic gases such as carbon monoxide and sulfuric chemicals, which are so detrimental to humans and environment, will be released to the atmosphere. For instance, Air pollution problem in Tehran has been caused some bothersome illnesses and beginning of lung cancer in people. On the other hand, improvement accesses to public transportation such as subways, which are fastest and convenient, will encourage people to use them and thus will have a great influence in the reduction of dirty gases in the air.
Another equally important reason is that there will be an effective economic growth in society. Using public transportation allow people to save their time and money. Take an example of a person who wants to go his office in the early morning. Not only it is possible to reach the office late but will consume more time and money in a traffic and noisy condition as well which will make him so anxious due to not to emit some endorphin in the brain that is responsible for his cheerfulness. A recently conducted study at Sharif University of technology, it was found out that consumption of oil fuels will decrease exponentially if just 30 percent of people use public transportation that will result in a significant growth on economics.
In conclusion, there are many reasons which can be persuasive enough for governments in order to improve accesses on public transportation that will have some essential benefits for society. Based on the given reasons above such as air pollution and economic growth, I highly recommend that governments should put more emphasis on using public transportation by encouraging people. Otherwise, we will annihilate our planet gradually by our own hands.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 287, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[7]
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually put between 'have' and 'been'.
Suggestion: have always been
...he mostly owing to the fact that people always have been expected some essential practical issue...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, so, thus, well, while, as to, for instance, in conclusion, kind of, such as, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.0286738351 163% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 43.0788530466 67% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 52.1666666667 127% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.0752688172 248% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2439.0 1977.66487455 123% => OK
No of words: 473.0 407.700716846 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15644820296 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66353547975 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93404350871 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 212.727598566 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551797040169 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 775.8 618.680645161 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.0600703553 48.9658058833 147% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.368421053 100.406767564 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8947368421 20.6045352989 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.47368421053 5.45110844103 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13095058561 0.236089414692 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0395143801935 0.076458572812 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.054022808015 0.0737576698707 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0865481705463 0.150856017488 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0361258634467 0.0645574589148 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 11.7677419355 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 58.1214874552 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 10.9000537634 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.01818996416 113% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 86.8835125448 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.