Some people think that governments should invest mainly in making public transportation faster while other think there are more important priorities (cost, the environment). Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Each world's nation has different points of view about their own monetary investments. Some countries choose to raise new city's facilities

instead

of repairing the old ones.

On the other hand

, some governments are positive that the best way is making improvements to the existing public transport. Certainly the best choice is related with the best price-performance ratio. On one hand, repair public transportation could be related to the old and almost destroyed trains constructions. For them, rather than making little changes, maybe the best option is to clean the area and star over building new railway lines.

Consequently

, the reconstruction of all connections and patterns will permit modern technologies enhances to the structures. In spite of that, the drawbacks are related to some nature concerns. When Governments build twice the same public equipments, they use more of ecological resources. In the train example, metal is a material that can be reused.

Moreover

,

this

posture helps with the budget of construction.

Besides

, one benefit of taking advantage of the old structures is the use of their historical value. Museum entrance fees can be useful, not only saving some public money, but

also

investing in the education of citizens. Actually, in Paranapiacaca, a city in Brazil, there is an example of a train museum. While it entertains a lot of visitors, it

also

offers a tour in an old wagon. To conclude, in my point of view, it is important to focus on the advantages of improvements, paying attention to the recycling and the creative use of historical tourism.