In many countries nowadays, people argue about the importance of the expenditure on current public transport and new railway lines for high-speed trains. From my point of view, governments should invest in the former rather than the latter.
Firstly, spending money on innovating public conveyor could be deemed a method to decrease air pollution and save fossil fuel. When buses are improved, they could carry more commuters for routine travel, which indicates that the number of people choosing such transportations as the main means of travelling will take off. Accordingly, exhaust emission from private vehicles will be under control and people could set aside a great deal of fuel. Besides, if the number of private vehicles such as cars and motorbikes drops off, there will no massive traffic jam. This is deduced that renovating public transport is predicted to tackle traffic problems.
In comparisons with public transport innovation, constructing new railways for modern trains has its pros and cons. On the one hand, people in favour of trains suppose that this kind of transportation gives them novel feelings and it is more affordable than planes or ships. For instance, people have to pay roughly 30 dollars to have a train journey from Hanoi to Ho Chi Minh city, whilst the figure for planes is nearly 100. On the other hand, since railways and trains are truly complicated and require high technology, building new ones will cost governments. When the governments’ revenue is insufficient, they will have to impose heavy taxes to civilians. In this case, people will have to carry new financial burdens instead of gaining benefits from these trains.
In conclusion, I believe that it is more worthy for authorities to spend money on existing public carriage than high-speed railway projects because of reasons mentioned above.
In
many
countries nowadays,
people
argue about the importance of the expenditure on
current
public
transport and
new
railway
lines for high-speed
trains
. From my point of view,
governments
should invest in the former
rather
than the latter.
Firstly
, spending money on innovating
public
conveyor could
be deemed
a method to decrease air pollution and save fossil fuel. When buses are
improved
, they could carry more commuters for routine travel, which indicates that the number of
people
choosing such transportations as the main means of travelling will take off.
Accordingly
, exhaust emission from private vehicles will be under control and
people
could set aside a great deal of fuel.
Besides
, if the number of private vehicles such as cars and motorbikes drops off, there will no massive traffic jam. This
is deduced
that renovating
public
transport
is predicted
to tackle traffic problems.
In comparisons with
public
transport innovation, constructing
new
railways
for modern
trains
has its pros and cons. On the one hand,
people
in
favour
of
trains
suppose that this kind of transportation gives them novel feelings and it is more affordable than
planes
or ships.
For instance
,
people
have to
pay roughly 30 dollars to have a
train
journey from Hanoi to
Ho Chi Minh city
, whilst the figure for
planes
is
nearly
100.
On the other hand
, since
railways
and
trains
are
truly
complicated and require high technology, building
new
ones will cost
governments
. When the
governments
’ revenue is insufficient, they will
have to
impose heavy taxes to civilians.
In this case
,
people
will
have to
carry
new
financial burdens
instead
of gaining benefits from these trains.
In conclusion
, I believe that it is more worthy for authorities to spend money on existing
public
carriage than high-speed
railway
projects
because
of reasons mentioned above.