It is widely recognized that the onus is on governments to allocate funding for improving the public transportation system. Given
this
, 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
mass
transits’ pace; meanwhile, others argue that it is imperative to spend more on other fields of priorities
such
as price and eco-friendly
energy
.
This
essay will
first
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
this
is that it could aid in conserving
time
and
energy
for commuting since travelling by these transports takes an excessive
time
that renders the passengers extremely fatigued.
Therefore
, they could utilize the saved
time
to accomplish more fruitful tasks.
However
, 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
mass
transit would take a heavy toll on national coffers, which are often too meagre. As
such
, the feasibility of the aforementioned proposal is questionable at best.
On the other hand
, I am convinced that it is better to spend more public money on other crucial priorities for
mass
transportation
such
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
energy
could help to reduce the toxic fumes exchanged from public transport, which is one of the chief culprits behind air pollution.
As a result
, it may alleviate the environmental degradation and decrease the potential health risks
such
as asthma, bronchitis and respiratory diseases,
thus
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
time
and effort.
Nonetheless
, they fail to factor in the fact that the enormous outlay to execute
such
a proposal may have a considerable bearing on the government budget.
Instead
, the focus should be diverted to other precedences
such
as fare and green
energy
, considering the fact that
this
not only helps the underprivileged to commute by
mass
transits but
also
mitigates the environmental deterioration.