All public transport should be free to the poorer. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is sometimes argued that each public

transit

Use synonyms

should be cost-free for the poorer population.

This

Linking Words

is an ongoing debate. I totally disagree with

this

Linking Words

viewpoint considering the influence on other people and governments. Making public modes of transportation charge-less could add more passengers, which will generate adverse effects on those who pay public

transit

Use synonyms

for their commute to work, school or travel. In big cities,

for example

Linking Words

, it is quite inconvenient to be stuck with a huge number of individuals on a crowded subway, especially during rush hours.

As a result

Linking Words

,

this

Linking Words

may cause plenty of stress for our body and brain system and

then

Linking Words

lead to severe health conditions in the long run.

Furthermore

Linking Words

, it is more likely to trigger conflicts and complaints in

such

Linking Words

a crowded situation after a bunch of low-income individuals take public transport as well.

On the other hand

Linking Words

,

this

Linking Words

measure will increase the economic burdens of authority, potentially limiting funds in other fields

such

Linking Words

as education and medication. Taking L as an example, it decided to make all the public

transit

Use synonyms

cost-free to reduce traffic jams, but its government must allocate billions of funds to compensate for

this

Linking Words

policy. Through the huge amount of money collected by governments and taxpayers, the funds in other fields will decrease, which means other people’s living standards might decrease. In conclusion, public

transit

Use synonyms

should not be free for the poorer because it will cause negative consequences. It is recommended that governments could choose other ways to assist poorer people.