Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation.
Government budget is contributed by tax paid by all citizens. Therefore, any of the state's investment can be a topic of heated debates. People even make their list of which field of program more worth of public venture. Between Internet access and public transportation, spending money in the betterment of the latter is more significant to me.
First and foremost, improvement of public vehicles seems to be benefits more citizens than upgradation of the Internet access. In many cities, especially large ones, the streets are always crowed in rush hours, which cause lots of frustration to travellers, who must waste hours of their precious time on the road. If buses and trains are more developed, more people would give up and join the public transportation commuters' group to reduce the time spent on trips between home and workplace or school. On top of this, in fact, trains and buses are already crowed with people that at peak times, people can even hardly breath properly because all spaces are filled. On the other hand, the Internet can be slow at some time and cause some irritation during the fixing process. However, obviously, the annoyance created by bad connection to the Internet is at a few point of times only while that caused by traffic problems exist every day of the year. Therefore, amendment of public transportation appears to be urgent and valuable to more people than the Internet access.
Addtionally, that public transportation became more advanced also brings some merits to environment protection. If buses and subways are more convenient and comfortable, more citizen would begin use them to travel instead of driving their own cars, which emit lots of toxic gases harmful to the atmosphere. Furthermore, as a result, since demand for private cars decrease, there would also be a decline in car manufacture, which also release a great deal of harmful pollutants into the environments. The majority of green cities around the world are the ones where buses, undergrounds and similar ones are main method of transportation. It can be easily seen that there is a link between amelioration of public transportation and environment protection. In contrast, advancement of Internet connection requires more construction of installing stations and wires undergrounds, hence polluting the environment. Consequently, upgrading public transport is clearly more advantageous.
In conclusion, the government's investment should be focused on upgrading public transportation than the Internet access. I hope that politicians can realize this and make the right choice when voting on assignments of state budgets so that every penny of citizens' contribution are worthwhile.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 85, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'states'' or 'state's'?
Suggestion: states'; state's
... by all citizens. Therefore, any of the states investment can be a topic of heated deb...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 609, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[9]
Message: The adverb 'hardly' is usually put before the verb 'even'.
Suggestion: hardly even
...h people that at peak times, people can even hardly breath properly because all spaces are ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 862, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun point seems to be countable; consider using: 'few points'.
Suggestion: few points
... bad connection to the Internet is at a few point of times only while that caused by traf...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...ore advantageous. In conclusion, the governments investment should be focused on upgradi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, so, therefore, while, in conclusion, in contrast, in fact, as a result, 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: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 43.0788530466 35% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 52.1666666667 119% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 8.0752688172 347% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2276.0 1977.66487455 115% => OK
No of words: 427.0 407.700716846 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33021077283 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0291434174 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 212.727598566 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56206088993 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 705.6 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.6070606989 48.9658058833 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.8 100.406767564 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.35 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.7 5.45110844103 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229356916969 0.236089414692 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0748997830559 0.076458572812 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0810144946971 0.0737576698707 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141727695441 0.150856017488 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.037998795589 0.0645574589148 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 11.7677419355 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 58.1214874552 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 10.9000537634 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 86.8835125448 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.