Government should spend money on railways than roads

It is argued that authorities spend their income on track rather than

harbour

Add an article

a harbour

the harbour

show examples

.

however

, I disagree with the statement that government must spend their money on railways. on one hand, those

people

who support that it is better to pay more money to track rather than streets. claim that it is more viable because public travel around the world by trains and not by cars or buses.

For example

, a study which was published in 2010 by Global Universities found that the percentage of nations

travel

Wrong verb form

travelling

show examples

by train increased sharply

last

decade. In my opinion, I don't think that

this

gives more advantages to railways rather than streets.

on the other hand

, I believe that

people

need more

roads

for their entertainment.

This

is because when

people

want to have fun on off days they often go to good places with good construction

roads

.

In addition

, if there were no great

roads

,

community

Add an article

the community

show examples

would not visit some countries. Another reason given to support

this

idea is that

roads

give cultural abstract that may interest a huge amount of human

being

Fix the agreement mistake

beings

show examples

.

For instance

, the government in Saudi Arabia has spent 20% of their income to interact with

people

to visit local and historical places in Riyadh and Abha

as well as

the United States. In conclusion,

although

railways may be a good investment for the public

due to

the increase in travel

last

few years , I believe that investing in streets are more vital for anyone because it reflects

cultural

Add an article

the cultural

a cultural

show examples

view

Fix the agreement mistake

views

show examples

of

tourist

Fix the agreement mistake

tourists

show examples

and citizens.