Some people think that public transport should be funded by the government so that it can be free to the people who use it. TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE

There are some debatable ideas heating an argument over the fact that many people assume that authorities should fully pay for transport tickets to make them accessible for all classes of citizens. While

this

thinking is valid to some extent, I would contend that they should reduce the price

instead

of making it free which can be a burden for society. It is indisputable that using public vehicles without being charged can bring a wealth of tremendous benefits for the community, especially in terms of the environment. In fact, the primary driver of air pollution is a large amount of greenhouse gas from an exponential increase of using private vehicles which mainly run on fossil fuel. By allocating money to make public transports free, governors can stimulate individuals to travel by bus which can transit a group of people, diminishing carbon dioxide emissions for each trip.

Therefore

, it is imperative that the government fund the tickets

of

Change preposition

for

show examples

public transports. While the redeeming feature of sponsoring is widely acknowledged, its drawback still lingers. With a shadow of a doubt, it puts strain on the government since they have to cover all the cost of maintenance and renovating facilities of these vehicles which need to be upgraded monthly and not to mention the pay of employees.

Hence

, it is quite unreasonable to evade all the responsibilities on governors’ shoulders.

Instead

, they should charge a fixed cost to assist these expenditures, so that not only can authorities benefit from that but

also

residents from all walks of life can have access to that public service. To sum up,

although

abolishing the transport fee can support the alleviation of environmental degradation, the expense should be subsidised rather than being free of charge for the sake of both citizens and governors.