Undoubtedly, deciding how to allocate budget to different sectors for sustainable development of nations is a challenging decision for governments. In this regard, one of the important problems raised in recent years, due to the technological development, is whether governments should assign more budget to improve internet-based infrastructures or other sectors such as the public transport. While some believe that governments should spend more money to ease internet access, others believe that sectors like public transport need more attention, hence, more monetary resources. Personally, I am in accord with the latter and the following are the reasons substantiating my view.
To begin with, the majority of people are dependent on urban transportation in their daily lives for commute, so this makes sense that governments should first meet the demand of the majority and facilitate the use of the transportation system for people. the precarious economic condition that is, mostly, prevalent in developing and underdevelopment countries, imposes challenges on people’s lives to provide their family and they need to cut expenses by using cheaper means of transportation like the mass transit. In such circumstances, governments should fulfill their duties towards people and assist them in this time of economic recession by financially supporting the projects improving the transportation system.
Moreover, having an overhauled and modern public transportation directly impacts the air pollution issue that most of the industrialized cities in the world are struggling with. Air pollution seriously affects the citizens’ health condition and brings about chronic respiratory system diseases like asthma. In its extreme, highly toxic pollutants infect and alter cells in the human body causing various cancers in the long run. By renovating the transportation system, for example, replacing hybrid vehicles with old-fashioned diesel engines, the air quality of cities will be imrpoved drastically. An example of my home town drives this notion home. While we have easy access to the high-speed internet connection and state-of-the-art communication technologies, the mass transit of the city is so inefficient and obsolete that almost every winter the number of people going to the hospital with breathing complaints doubles. Had the government prioritized the transportation system over the development of internet infrastructure, we would not have to be forced to breathe the toxic air of the city each day.
To sum up, I believe that governments should spend the majority of their budgets to recondition the transportation system. This is because not only the majority of people are dependent on the public transport in their daily lives, but also doing so will significantly improve the air quality of cities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Undoubtedly, deciding how to allocate bu...
^^^
Line 3, column 256, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...f the transportation system for people. the precarious economic condition that is, ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, moreover, so, while, for example, such as, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 15.1003584229 73% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 43.0788530466 60% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 52.1666666667 117% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 8.0752688172 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2413.0 1977.66487455 122% => OK
No of words: 426.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66431924883 4.8611393121 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.28800513384 2.67179642975 123% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 212.727598566 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56103286385 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 738.0 618.680645161 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 61.2040324958 48.9658058833 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.8125 100.406767564 150% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.625 20.6045352989 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.45110844103 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185454489682 0.236089414692 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0604995851018 0.076458572812 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0530851532597 0.0737576698707 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121211072137 0.150856017488 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0759542933445 0.0645574589148 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 11.7677419355 157% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 58.1214874552 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.1575268817 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 10.9000537634 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.82 8.01818996416 122% => OK
difficult_words: 132.0 86.8835125448 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.002688172 150% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => 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: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.