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

Nowadays, there is a debate associated with

governments

Correct word choice

whether governments

show examples

should invest significant money in

railways

rather than roads. In my opinion, developing

railways

can help to resolve traffic issues, and it can lead to individuals moving to rural areas without any concern about their commute. It is my view that governments should invest more money in

railways

due to

encourage people to commute by

train

and it can lead to reducing the amount of traffics.

Moreover

, it can encourage the population to live in

the

Correct article usage

apply

show examples

suburban area and commute by

train

.

Furthermore

, using a

train

can decreases the proportion of time commuters spend to reach their destination.

In addition

, fares can be a great source of revenue for the government, so they should invest in the infrastructure of

trains

and public transport.

Also

,

trains

are an environmentally friendly form of transport, so

trains

can help protect the environment.

In contrast

, a group of people claim that if governments spend more money to develop roads, It can lead to reducing the number of accidents that happen because of bad road conditions.

Moreover

, It can decline the amount of traffic in the city.

However

, I do not find the argument convincing as developing roads condition can not reduce traffic size;

instead

, it causes more people to use privet cars, and it can lead to an increase in the number of accidents. In conclusion, I agree entirely that city planners should invest in

railways

to improve

train

systems to promote the use of alternative forms of transportation,

such

as

trains

, buses, and aeroplanes, to protect the environment and reduce congestion in cities.