In some countries, the government has tried to reduce traffic. For instance, they imposed a congestion tax during rush hour. Do you think this development is positive or negative?

Countries around the world are considering how to decrease the level of high vehicle numbers in many major towns and cities at their busiest time of day using a levy to do so. I believe overall

this

Linking Words

is a good way of achieving

such

Linking Words

an aim. For some years pedestrianised zones in city centres have become a more prominent feature of their central areas as an example, the city of London introduced a car-free zone during the stewardship of Ken Livingstone in the early 2000s, achieving mixed success. Though, some would argue that

this

Linking Words

is a necessary means to fight pollution and traffic congestion there are others who argue that it is a costly and burdensome penalty on commuters.

However

Linking Words

, the arguments in favour of traffic-free areas or congestion charges are multitudinous. With the environmental challenges currently facing every nation. Measures to tackle carbon emissions at every (‘all’ as an alternative word) level of society must surely be welcomed

Nonetheless

Linking Words

, detractors say that

such

Linking Words

prohibitive schemes have an unwelcome impact on freedom of movement and the economy. As many people own cars and

such

Linking Words

moves would make it costly for them to travel to and from work, with many living in suburban areas particularly affected due to the poor quality of public transport networks outside the cities. It may be of benefit to the environment but the economic costs must be considered before reaching a In conclusion, I would say that measures to reduce traffic congestion in cities are broadly a positive development, yet one must not fail to consider the economic costs for individuals before taking

such

Linking Words

steps.