A belief related to public transportation is government should invest huge amount of money for building high-speed trains between cities, while, other think this money should be spent on current public transportation. In my point of view, I assume this improving is totally useful, but authorities should see this statement from different sight like geographic situations.
To begin with, the advantages of fast trains are inevitable and absolutely they can improve the speed of commuting. For example, employees who their works are in other towns could use this facilities, as a result, they can save their both energy and time. working freshly for more time are two significant factors which could benefits both individuals and government. In addition, this type of trains has minimum casualty rates and accidents, hence, fast transportation and safe situation are two giant advantages of this kind of trains. But, a big question about this statement is: where fast trains are much more useful?
On the other hand, high-speed trains require tremendous area for being active. I mean, these types of trains are useful in vast countries which distances between cities are enough long. For example, America, Iran and China are good example of this sort of country. In contrast, I assume high-speed trains could not be useful in tiny countries like Qatar. Furthermore, the government should precisely compare the fund of this construction with improvement of existing transportation services. Because, in some cases this changes not only are not helpful, but also they founded as an action which just ruin the money. For example, in third world country, which they have not appropriate simple facilities for transportation, they should firstly work on these kinds of public transportation.
In conclude, constructions of fast trains are useful literally, but before this massive improvement, its factor should be checked.
A belief related to public
transportation
is
government
should invest huge amount of money for building high-speed
trains
between cities, while, other
think
this money should
be spent
on
current
public
transportation
. In my point of view, I assume this improving is
totally
useful
,
but
authorities should
see
this statement from
different
sight like geographic situations.
To
begin
with, the advantages of
fast
trains
are inevitable and
absolutely
they can
improve
the speed of commuting. For
example
, employees who their works are in other towns could
use
this
facilities,
as a result
, they can save their both energy and time.
working
freshly
for more time are two significant factors which could
benefits
both individuals and
government
.
In addition
, this type of
trains
has minimum casualty rates and accidents,
hence
,
fast
transportation
and safe situation are two giant advantages of this kind of
trains
.
But
, a
big
question about this statement is: where
fast
trains
are much more useful?
On the other hand
, high-speed
trains
require tremendous area for being active. I mean, these types of
trains
are
useful
in vast
countries
which distances between cities are
enough
long. For
example
, America, Iran and China are
good
example
of this sort of
country
.
In contrast
, I assume high-speed
trains
could not be
useful
in tiny
countries
like Qatar.
Furthermore
, the
government
should
precisely
compare the fund of this construction with improvement of existing
transportation
services.
Because
, in
some
cases this
changes
not
only
are not helpful,
but
also
they founded as an action which
just
ruin the money. For
example
, in third world
country
, which they have not appropriate simple facilities for
transportation
, they should
firstly
work on these kinds of public transportation.
In conclude, constructions of
fast
trains
are
useful
literally
,
but
before
this massive improvement, its factor should be
checked
.