The growing population in most major cities has made transportation an important topic. While some people believe a huge sum of money should be used in constructing new railway lines for very fast trains, others believe in the improvement of already existing means of public transportation. This essay will discuss both arguments in detail and give a concluding opinion.
On the one hand, those who support the improvement of existing public transport argue that it is a cheaper alternative. They claim it is more financially prudent to get more buses and fix damaged roads (for instance) and divert the remaining funds to other sectors of the economy. In addition, they claim that the poor maintenance culture in most countries would seem to affect the new railway lines after some years.
However, those who support the construction of new railway lines cite it as a possible means of depopulating major cities. They argue that if there are fast trains connecting cities, people would be able to live in one city and work in the other. This can be exemplified in countries like China where there are fast trains connecting cities and thus have been able to combat overcrowding of major cities. Also, it would appear that constructing new railway lines would reduce the pressure on already existing public transport, thereby making it more efficient. Furthermore, new railway lines might increase the ease of business transactions as goods can be transported with ease from one city to another, thus leading to an increase in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the country.
To conclude, i would tend to side with the proponents of building new rail lines. Although it seems to be the more expensive option, it would appear to be more logical and financially rewarding in the long run. However, proper maintenance strategies should be put in place for optimal benefits.
The growing population in most major
cities
has made transportation an
important
topic. While
some
people
believe a huge sum of money should be
used
in constructing
new
railway
lines
for
very
fast
trains, others believe in the improvement of already existing means of public transportation. This essay will discuss both arguments in detail and give a concluding opinion.
On the one hand, those who support the improvement of existing public transport argue that it is a cheaper alternative. They claim it is more
financially
prudent to
get
more buses and
fix
damaged roads (
for instance
) and divert the remaining funds to other sectors of the economy.
In addition
, they claim that the poor maintenance culture in most countries would seem to affect the
new
railway
lines
after
some
years.
However
, those who support the construction of
new
railway
lines
cite it as a possible means of depopulating major
cities
. They argue that if there are
fast
trains connecting
cities
,
people
would be able to
live
in one city and work in the other. This can
be exemplified
in countries like China where there are
fast
trains connecting
cities
and
thus
have been able to combat overcrowding of major
cities
.
Also
, it would appear that constructing
new
railway
lines
would
reduce
the pressure on already existing public transport, thereby making it more efficient.
Furthermore
,
new
railway
lines
might increase the
ease
of business transactions as
goods
can
be transported
with
ease
from one city to another,
thus
leading to an increase in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the country.
To conclude
,
i
would tend to side with the proponents of building
new
rail
lines
. Although it seems to be the more expensive option, it would appear to be more logical and
financially
rewarding in the long run.
However
, proper maintenance strategies should
be put
in place for optimal benefits.