It is widely recognized that the onus is on governments to allocate funding for improving the public transportation system. Given
, much has been debated over what parts should be focused on. One school of thought holds that the state subsidies should be directed towards the betterment of
transits’ pace; meanwhile, others argue that it is imperative to spend more on other fields of priorities
as price and eco-friendly
.
essay will
scrutinize both views before presenting my final thought.
On the one hand, many people are pro that state funding should be invested in increasing the speed of public transports, and justifiably so. The key rationale of
is that it could aid in conserving
and
for commuting since travelling by these transports takes an excessive
that renders the passengers extremely fatigued.
, they could utilize the saved
to accomplish more fruitful tasks.
, given the incurred costs paid for infrastructure, employees’
salaryFix the agreement mistake
show examples
, among others, the colossal expenses associated with running the faster mode of
transit would take a heavy toll on national coffers, which are often too meagre. As
, the feasibility of the aforementioned proposal is questionable at best.
, I am convinced that it is better to spend more public money on other crucial priorities for
transportation
as costs and the environment. In terms of the former, as the fares of the public transport are too exorbitant for some people, subsiding to bring down the cost could help inhabitants, especially those from middle- and low-income groups, facilitate taking a ride to travel to their desired destinations. Regarding the environment, expanding the budget for investment in environmentally friendly
could help to reduce the toxic fumes exchanged from public transport, which is one of the chief culprits behind air pollution.
, it may alleviate the environmental degradation and decrease the potential health risks
as asthma, bronchitis and respiratory diseases,
improving public health.
To summarize, proponents of increasing funding allotted to develop fast means for public transport often emphasize how it can help citizens in reducing the waste of
and effort.
, they fail to factor in the fact that the enormous outlay to execute
a proposal may have a considerable bearing on the government budget.
, the focus should be diverted to other precedences
as fare and green
, considering the fact that
not only helps the underprivileged to commute by
transits but
mitigates the environmental deterioration.