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.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
In the modern era, governments make an effort to provide people with the facilities and services in order to meet the specific needs of them. Technology brought about a growth in transportation infrastructure and the internet. One of the most challenging topics on which there is no consensus among managers is about allocating financial supports. Opinions are divided into whether it would be better and important to invest money in developing internet access, or public transportation should be prioritized. When it comes to me, it is my firm conviction that although the internet is of great importance, governments should give their financial support to public transportation. To support this, there are several reasons, two of which are going to be aptly explored in the following essay.
First and foremost, the development of transit services leads to an improvement in vital aspects of society. According to the statistics, large cities encounter an increase in car ownership, which not only has an adverse effect on people's mobility but also their health and environment are in danger. As it is proved, cars emit toxic gases, and if the number of gases existing in air surpasses the limitation and its allowed amount, the situation will be perilous, especially for older people. They can rarely take a deep breath in the fresh air. In consequence, the rate of diseases such as lung cancers will increase. Moreover, adolescents get a chronic headache and become physically frail caused by polluted air. Also, doctors declare that when a city suffers from air pollution for a couple of days, the hospitals reach their zenith in the number of their patients. So this indicates a great role of public transportation in the reduction of emissions.
Another worthwhile reason to be mentioned is that public transportation leads to a gigantic step in the growth of the economy and prevent from being stagnant. By transit developments, the government provides a great job opportunity for unemployed. Also, it would be much easier and less time consuming to get to the destinations. Therefore people get more persuaded to use these services which end up in a healthy economy. Take my experience as a compelling example of this, last year I visited a manufacturing company, where it produces wagons. The manager stated that after the renovation of the subway, people use it more rapidly, and as a result, he had established his second company to answer the demands.
In summary of what has been illustrated and discussed in detail, it is a foregone conclusion that public transportation should be noticed financially. The fact that it will help people to live healthily is coupled with the growth in the economy is the reason which strengthens my claim.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 330, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...e consuming to get to the destinations. Therefore people get more persuaded to use these ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, moreover, second, so, then, therefore, while, in summary, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 43.0788530466 77% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 52.1666666667 123% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.0752688172 235% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2309.0 1977.66487455 117% => OK
No of words: 451.0 407.700716846 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11973392461 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0157411554 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 212.727598566 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572062084257 0.524837075471 109% => OK
syllable_count: 723.6 618.680645161 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1338031049 48.9658058833 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.954545455 100.406767564 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 20.6045352989 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.54545454545 5.45110844103 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 11.8709677419 126% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192118859748 0.236089414692 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0462452361339 0.076458572812 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0377100971407 0.0737576698707 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106532878907 0.150856017488 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0495408371611 0.0645574589148 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.46 8.01818996416 118% => OK
difficult_words: 138.0 86.8835125448 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => 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: 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.