Nowadays, charter-flight has brought significant changes to our lives. However, whether the cheap aircrafts should be prohibited due to its negative impact is a controversial issue. I am of the opinion that banning low-cost airline would do more harm than good.
There are significant drawbacks associated with preventing low-price aircrafts. First of all, it is clear that this action would lead to many people will be unemployed. This means that cheap aircraft provide jobs for thousands of citizens and without them mass unemployment would be alternative. Moreover, most of these flights are to tourism destinations, so the economics of tourist hotspots would be severely damaged. For example, the income of restaurants and equipment hire business in this location would be greatly reduced and causing the destruction of the entire economy. Therefore, the local authorities should give a priority to improve quality of charter-flight rather than prohibiting it.
This is not to say that curbing low-cost airlines would not bring advantage to society. There are, of course, with the resulting reduction in flight, less airports would need to be constructed. This may be a good outcome because airports are costly for government seeing that expensive infrastructure such as roads and rail lines are required to reach them. In addition, Aircraft run on fossil fuels that discharge pollutants into the environment, so if a government do not enact law to ban cheap air flights, it would increase the greenhouse effect and lead to environmental contamination. But still, the cons are far greater.
In conclusion, making an effort to prohibit charter-flight will have an influence on the economic development of the country. Meanwhile, local authorities must shoulder their responsibilities to protect the environment. Only by doing so we can assure that we could hand this beautiful planet to our next generation and the next generation after.
Nowadays, charter-flight has brought significant
changes
to our
lives
.
However
, whether the
cheap
aircrafts
should
be prohibited
due to its
negative
impact is a controversial issue. I am of the opinion that banning low-cost airline would do more harm than
good
.
There are significant drawbacks associated with preventing low-price
aircrafts
.
First of all
, it is
clear
that this action would lead to
many
people
will
be unemployed
. This means that
cheap
aircraft
provide jobs for thousands of citizens and without them mass unemployment would be alternative.
Moreover
, most of these flights are to tourism destinations,
so
the economics of tourist hotspots would be
severely
damaged.
For example
, the income of restaurants and equipment hire business in this location would be
greatly
reduced
and causing the destruction of the entire economy.
Therefore
, the local authorities should give a priority to
improve
quality of charter-flight
rather
than prohibiting it.
This is not to say that curbing low-cost airlines would not bring advantage to society. There are,
of course
, with the resulting reduction in flight,
less
airports would need to
be constructed
. This may be a
good
outcome
because
airports are costly for
government
seeing that expensive infrastructure such as roads and rail lines
are required
to reach them.
In addition
,
Aircraft
run on fossil fuels that discharge pollutants into the environment,
so
if a
government
do not enact law to ban
cheap
air flights, it would increase the greenhouse effect and lead to environmental contamination.
But
still
, the cons are far greater.
In conclusion
, making an effort to prohibit charter-flight will have an influence on the economic development of the country. Meanwhile, local authorities
must
shoulder their responsibilities to protect the environment.
Only
by doing
so
we can assure that we could hand this
beautiful
planet to our
next
generation and the
next
generation after.