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 recent centuries most of the people in the world are living in the cities. While the cities have become so crowded, and the life in them has become more complex, modern technologies has dramatically affected the urban life. Today internet and public transportation systems such as swift trains play very important rules in people lives. The governments spend a lot on providing, maintaining, and improving these two infrastructures. The question that is actually hard to reach consensus is which one should be taken more important by governments. I agree with many people who believe that improving internet access is more important, because of some considerable reasons, two of which are elaborated here.
Since the advent of computers, the relating technologies such as internet have developed concomitantly, opening new opportunities for many businesses to flourish. Today, in the modern countries many businesses are shaped based on the internet. The business owners can exhibit their products in their websites or Instagram pages so easily and with a little cost. There is no need for them to spend a lot of money on advertisement in TV or billboards. They can also get connected to their customers who access internet through different ways such as emails or telegram. On the other hands, for many businesses it is now unnecessary to rent places to run their business. They can wholly rely on internet. For instance, a clothes shop can simply exhibit its clothes on Instagram, then take offers from the costumers, and send the chosen products to them, the process which is much easier and cheaper.
Alongside what we discussed above, and considering the public transportation which is the other choice in the debate, it seems that internet access can have some benefits of public transportation too. As it is obvious, the main purpose of developing public transportation is to reduce the city traffic and the concomitant air pollution. Well, this can all be achieved by the internet! If governments improve internet access, many people can choose their paths more efficiently using the GPS. Smartphones can use the internet to find the shorter paths and help their owners to spend less time in the traffic, producing less carbon dioxide. On the other hand, many bureaucratic tasks can be simplified by internet. Offices such as banks can provide people with internet services, which can eliminate the need for going to the offices. For instance, people would be able to pay for their bills at home using internet, instead of going to the banks and adding to the city traffic.
According to what we discussed; although some may disagree, it seems that it is more beneficial for the governments to focus on improving internet access. Not only will it help many new businesses to thrive, but also it can do the public transportation's job, reducing the traffic and pollution in the city. Governments should not take the advantages of internet access for granted, and try to improve it by all means.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, may, so, then, well, while, for instance, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 9.8082437276 194% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 52.1666666667 115% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2521.0 1977.66487455 127% => OK
No of words: 496.0 407.700716846 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08266129032 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71922212354 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88743958025 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 212.727598566 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.524837075471 95% => OK
syllable_count: 779.4 618.680645161 126% => 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: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.4230607477 48.9658058833 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.041666667 100.406767564 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 20.6045352989 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.875 5.45110844103 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230741688008 0.236089414692 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0723942866872 0.076458572812 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0567743190109 0.0737576698707 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165139518188 0.150856017488 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0527433598398 0.0645574589148 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 11.7677419355 109% => 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: 12.18 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 86.8835125448 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.