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 that the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

In recent years, the development of mass transit has never failed to draw public attention. Many hold a view that governments should spend budgets on the construction of cutting-edge transport
while
the counterargument is that the augmentation of current public vehicles is more important. Personally, I believe governments should make decisions based on specific circumstances. On the one hand, it is crucial to recognise that high-speed rail provides commuters with a fast and more convenient method of travelling. Nowadays, there is a great number of people who have to travel a vast distance between different urban areas to go to their workplaces, which is gruelling and time-consuming.
Hence
, the advent of metro systems would be a remedy
due to
their phenomenal speed.
Furthermore
, trains can carry thousands of passengers simultaneously thanks to their impressive capacity, which leads to a reduction in the number of private vehicles and alleviates traffic congestion
as well as
the emission of greenhouse gases. An example of
this
justification is the UK Underground, which has been globally renowned for its merits.
On the other hand
, objectors may argue that the expenditure on subways should have been spent on other social aspects and suggest authorities concentrate on improving the quality of current mass transit systems
instead
.
This
argument is somewhat true since the budget required for the construction of state-of-the-art methods of travelling would be extremely high and that may be at the expense of the money which should have been used to tackle other social issues.
Therefore
, traditional public vehicles will be invested in because of their affordability.
For instance
, the Cambodian government has long been focusing on the quality of their intercity coaches and national routes in place of erecting railway lines
due to
limited financial capacity. Taking all the mentioned facts into account,
it is clear that
novel travelling methods will be more suited for developed countries,
whereas
developing countries should be content with the current means of transport. In my opinion, the decision as to which method should be prioritised requires
further
consideration.
Submitted by hughdaoxvii on

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

content
Provide more specific examples and evidence to support your arguments.
content
Make sure to clearly address both views and provide a balanced discussion of each.
structure
Organize your essay into clear paragraphs with topic sentences to improve coherence and cohesion.
Topic Vocabulary:
  • infrastructure
  • efficient
  • congestion
  • sustainable
  • environmentally friendly
  • connectivity
  • economic growth
  • public transportation
What to do next:
Look at other essays: