It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation
In contemporary society, Internet access as well as public transportation are both issues that the government needs to consider in urban development. Regarding to these issues, it is the long-lasting debate among the authorities whether governments should spend money to improve Internet access than communal transportation. From my pointe of view, I am completely agree with the above statement because of some reasons as below.
To begin with, facilitating Internet access would make it easier for individuals to acquire valuable information. To be more specific, Internet normally provide searchers with a number of professional knowledge and practical message they need. In this case, if the government could distribute funds to build up the Internet access, it is obviously to see that citizens could have a more favorable approach to obtain the content. With the information gained from the Internet, they would make greater achievements in their own fields and thus live a delightful life. For instance, numerous graduates nowadays use the Internet to check job postings and send out resumes directly to the ideal companies. Enterprises are equally using the Internet access to post recruitment information and interview candidates online. As a result, the applicants would successfully join their desired firms and the companies would recruit many satisfied employees online. Hence, the Internet access could open a convenient channel for users to search precious message.
What is more, excellent Internet technology could make a country acquire a strong competitiveness in the world. In the future the competition between countries will be mainly in technology, and the reforming of high-tech will be brought by the Internet to a large extent. Under this circumstance, the administration should put more effort into Internet technology so that they would have powerful competitive force and influence in the international community. In contrast, if the government put expenditures to promote common transportation instead of Internet. It is true that it brings advantages for residents to get around. However, without financial support, high-tech of the state may not get improved and the evolution of the country would lag behind the world eventually. From what discussed above, it is more significant for the administration to focus on the progress of Internet rather than public transportation.
Last but not least, there is no need for the administrative department to attach too much importance to communal transport because many cities now have perfect transport systems. Numerous approaches of transportation such as high-speed rail and airplane, have provided visitors with a variety of ways to travel thus the government should not pay more attention to public transport. On the contrary, they should be more concerned about the industries like Internet that have a great deal of potential in the future.
To sum up, from what has been discussed above, we may reach the conclusion that it is more essential for governments to give the funds to accelerate Internet instead of common transportation since the Internet access would benefit not only the individual's progress but also the whole nation's development.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 366, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'agreed'.
Suggestion: agreed
...From my pointe of view, I am completely agree with the above statement because of som...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 285, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'nations'' or 'nation's'?
Suggestion: nations'; nation's
...individuals progress but also the whole nations development.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, thus, well, for instance, in contrast, such as, as a result, as well as, it is true, on the contrary, to begin with, to sum up, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 9.8082437276 214% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 43.0788530466 58% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 52.1666666667 146% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 8.0752688172 334% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2736.0 1977.66487455 138% => OK
No of words: 498.0 407.700716846 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49397590361 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72397222731 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12209930536 2.67179642975 117% => OK
Unique words: 271.0 212.727598566 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.544176706827 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 846.0 618.680645161 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 15.0 4.94265232975 303% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.8335613014 48.9658058833 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.363636364 100.406767564 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6363636364 20.6045352989 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.68181818182 5.45110844103 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 11.8709677419 160% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.408978329235 0.236089414692 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106474866561 0.076458572812 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0748967808246 0.0737576698707 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.222210762936 0.150856017488 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.055460422505 0.0645574589148 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 11.7677419355 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 10.9000537634 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 86.8835125448 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.