Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

The mobility of people within a country or city is equal to its economic growth.

Similarly

, transportation plays a significant role in economic development. In my opinion, governments must invest more money in building

rail

networks. These are economically viable as they haul more goods and people at once.

However

, using vehicles is expensive to maintain.

This

adds to congestion and pollution. Metro or goods rails are the best options for conveyance.

Firstly

, they are capable of loading more commuters and luggage in a single trip as compared to

cars

and buses.

Likewise

, commuters from residential areas into towns can utilize a train, which saves time and fuel.

Subsequently

, one can clearly see the convenience of trains.

For instance

, commuters from Pretoria to Johannesburg can use the Gautrain, which is more appropriate than using roads.

Conversely

, using

cars

and buses leads to congestion and pollution. More so, maintaining a steady supply of fuel to satisfy the exorbitant numbers of vehicles on the

road

is detrimental to the environment.

Although

road

transport is appealing owing to its flexibility, there are more

road

accidents than

rail

.

In addition

, congestion puts economic pressure on governments to develop more efficient

road

systems

thus

making

rail

a better option. In conclusion, the advantages of investing more in trains outweigh those of using

cars

and buses.

This

makes

rail

the aptest means of transference. Carriageway transport, despite its appeal on opulence, creates bottlenecks and is hazardous to the environment. If more people use trains, there will be fewer

cars

on the roads.

Therefore

, governments should channel more funding toward rails than on roads.