The advent of different transportation ways has enabled a major paradigm shift to people’s daily life, and it was so significant that it had an undeniable role in virtually any industry. Many have been debating whether or not the governemnt should allocate more funds on internet infrastructure than public transportation. In some situations a good internet is very important and indispensable, however, public transportation has a more important role in peoples lives. In my view, government should not expend more budget to internet access in contrast to public transportation.
The first and foremost reason is that the public transportation have a crucial effect on price of all goods, and consequently affects people’s daily life. A pertinent example can shed light on this assertion. Three years ago, an abrupt increase in fuel’s price made a surge in the price of all goods. From vegetables to milk, meat and even the bread. When the price of was swelled, transportation was more expensive, therefore the farmer had to spend more money for the gasoline. On the other hand shipment of cattle was affected and this made a cascade negative impact on the economy of our country. After month of protest, the government decreased the fee of fuel and things backed to normal. As can be seen, a decision which had affected public transportation, led to lots of reactions from people and compelled the government to accept its mistake
Another reason that should be taken into account is that the budget of making roads, subways, airports etc is markedly more than an excellent internet access requirements. For instance, These days, the price of raw oil is ascending in a high rate, and it can have a great impact on transportation conditions. raw oil which is converted to a large number of products is an undegradable part of the asphalt, which is base of the roads. Moreover, gasoline price is also directly related to the price of oil. On the other hand, experts in the field of Information Technology are finding newer and more convenient way for internet access which makes it cheaper. In nutshell, expenses of the public transportation system is growing in a staggering rate, while technology is introducing new generations of cheaper internet infrastructure.
According to the reasons mentioned above, administrators should not invest more on internet than public transportation because of two reasons. First, it controls prices of many goods which deals with peoples daily needs. What is more, public transportation need much more efforts and financial resources to be improved.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 217, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...y any industry. Many have been debating whether or not the governemnt should allocate more fun...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 310, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Raw
...at impact on transportation conditions. raw oil which is converted to a large numbe...
^^^
Line 3, column 340, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...nditions. raw oil which is converted to a large number of products is an undegradable part of the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, while, for instance, in contrast, in contrast to, in my view, what is more, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 43.0788530466 35% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 52.1666666667 109% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.0752688172 223% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2187.0 1977.66487455 111% => OK
No of words: 420.0 407.700716846 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20714285714 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52701905584 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1290271104 2.67179642975 117% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535714285714 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 674.1 618.680645161 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 9.59856630824 21% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => 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: 59.1650234514 48.9658058833 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.35 100.406767564 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 20.6045352989 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.2 5.45110844103 150% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.88709677419 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.242611903944 0.236089414692 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0744413102852 0.076458572812 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0885892924395 0.0737576698707 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16196779707 0.150856017488 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0605015260034 0.0645574589148 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 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: 12.94 10.9000537634 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 86.8835125448 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => 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: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.