People emphasizing government to build an advanced transport system rather new roads for vehicles that are overcrowding the cities. Do you agree or disagree?

Recently, the phenomenon of improving transport system by authorities in crowded cities and its corresponding impacts has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of public transport is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that eliminating traffic jam can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, substituting private transport with buses and trains can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that both traffic congestion, as well as air pollution, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the merits of electric cars. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both new means of transportation and clean fuel apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of general economy, expanding highways across the country might increase the consequences of financial restrictions. Moreover, fundamental aspects of construction limitations relate to this reality that the demerits of road expansion pertain to higher number of vehicles.As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of official investments is correlated negatively with social contentment. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of metropolitan.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of emphasis on governmental aid on public transport far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only the advantages of advanced systems prove the significance of development, but also pinpoint car implications.

Votes
Average: 7.7 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 192, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
... the fact that both traffic congestion, as well as air pollution, are inextricably bound u...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 288, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: As
...on pertain to higher number of vehicles.As a tangible example, some scientific res...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 31.9359605911 122% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1550.0 1207.87684729 128% => OK
No of words: 269.0 242.827586207 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.76208178439 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34829723502 2.71678728327 123% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 139.433497537 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.676579925651 0.580463131201 117% => OK
syllable_count: 485.1 379.143842365 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.9031963158 50.4703680194 144% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.909090909 104.977214359 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4545454545 20.9669160288 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.25397266985 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.090002171852 0.242375264174 37% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0306758315572 0.0925447433944 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0265119596809 0.071462118173 37% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0493820450911 0.151781067708 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0196714732908 0.0609392437508 32% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 12.6369458128 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 53.1260098522 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.42 11.5310837438 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.17 8.32886699507 134% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 55.0591133005 196% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.