Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
It is more important for government to spend money to improve internet access that to improve public transportation.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
In modernized and civilized societies, public transportation has always been among primary concerns of human beings’ lives. Today, it is axiomatic that people spend larger part of their lives traveling to work or other places. A plethora of people possess the conviction that government should spend more money on improving the internet access, whereas others might holds the conviction that spending more money on the public transportation. I firmly endorse the latter one due to the couple of reasons which are about saving people’s time and preventing pollutions. In what follows, this essay is going aptly delve into the most outstanding reasons to advocate my point of view.
The first exquisite point to be mentioned is that people, especially who live in crowded city, always are on the way to go somewhere for various purposes. Therefore, they spend a lot of time on their ways. As a result, these commuters can use the sufficient public transportation instead of their own vehicles. Thus, if the government improve the transportation systems such as bus and motorways, people will spend less time on the way because of less traffic, and also they will use these spare time to study or rest instead of much stresses which they must tolerate during driving. In my own experience, I have bought some books which I read them as long as I am in subway on the way of university.
Another equally noteworthy point supporting my opinion is about the environment and effects of the public transportation on it. Accordingly, vehicles cause a lot of traffics and pollution. Since, there is not the suitable transportation system. The government can prevent these kind of air-polluting by enhancing the cities’ public transportation. For instance, Tehran is the most crowded and polluted city in our country. However, after constructing the subways almost throughout the city, the pollution rate decreases and nowadays citizens can have a better climate in their living place.
To put it briefly, both enumerated reasons lead us to the conclusion that not only are spending more money on developing the public transportation system by the government are not unessential, but also it is key factor which gives rise to have better condition to live. However, a paramount issue which must be mentioned is that this cannot use as a prescription for every society and some counter examples might exist. It is advisable that some statistical studies must be done for each city to answer this question precisely.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 320, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... instead of their own vehicles. Thus, if the government improve the transportatio...
^^
Line 3, column 531, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
... spare time to study or rest instead of much stresses which they must tolerate durin...
^^^^
Line 5, column 190, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... cause a lot of traffics and pollution. Since, there is not the suitable transportati...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 273, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this kind' or 'these kinds'?
Suggestion: this kind; these kinds
...tion system. The government can prevent these kind of air-polluting by enhancing the citie...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, briefly, but, first, however, if, so, therefore, thus, whereas, for instance, kind of, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 52.1666666667 92% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 8.0752688172 272% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2120.0 1977.66487455 107% => OK
No of words: 410.0 407.700716846 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17073170732 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98026924271 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548780487805 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 655.2 618.680645161 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.6469709756 48.9658058833 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.578947368 100.406767564 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5789473684 20.6045352989 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.63157894737 5.45110844103 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.88709677419 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209768879376 0.236089414692 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0545085093352 0.076458572812 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.067340769577 0.0737576698707 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123659003547 0.150856017488 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0496414294515 0.0645574589148 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 11.7677419355 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 10.9000537634 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.01818996416 110% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 86.8835125448 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.