In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion

Investing in massive

transportation

infrastructure has all been a controversial issue. In some nations, while some people emphasize the necessity of investment in fast train

railway

lines that connect different urban areas, others believe we should improve current public

transportation

within cities.

Besides

exploring both sides of the argument, in

this

essay, I will explain why I do agree with the latter group. on the one hand, the advocates of interurban railways development highlight the less environmental damages that

this

mode

of

transportation

might cause compared to other existing fast modes of

transport

such

as

airplanes

Change the spelling

aeroplanes

show examples

. To justify their claim,

this

group refer to some research that says

airplanes

Change the spelling

aeroplanes

show examples

are the most polluting

mode

of

transportation

and should be replaced by fast trains.

Furthermore

, those who support fast railways infrastructure remind the possibility of the deficiency of current intercity

transportation

considering a large

number

of passengers and workers who would commute between different urban areas on daily basis. In some countries like Japan,

for instance

, a large amount of money is dedicated to constructing a high fast

railway

line that connects 6 big cities and is estimated to carry a huge

number

of passengers in near future.

On the other hand

, taking a utilitarian approach, the supporters of improving the current inner-city public

transportation

system point to the much larger

number

of city dwellers that can be benefited from

such

improvement compared to the

number

of intercity passengers who might get an advantage of fast

railway

construction.

Thus

, it seems logical to allocate the public budget to a more publicly beneficial area.

Moreover

, another possible merit of improvement in the existing public

transport

system is the reduction in the use of personal vehicles which are said to be responsible for more than 30% of urban pollution. Better accessibility to public

transportation

would convince individuals to commute with the less time-wasting

mode

of

transportation

instead

of getting stuck in heavy traffic with their personal vehicles. If governments do not invest enough money in intercity public

transport

, people would prefer to use their personal vehicles, resulting in more air pollution within cities that impact negatively a large

number

of citizens. In conclusion, developing new fast

railway

lines might reduce air pollution and compensate for the inadequacy of the current intercity

mode

of

transportation

in the future, I believe government should allocate public money to developing intercity public

transport

because not only it would serve a much larger of citizens, but

also

it can mitigate the air problem solution in populous urban areas.