Focus on Learner
- Submitted by: Maitt
- Views: 371
- Category: English
- Date Submitted: 10/18/2012 02:02 AM
- Pages: 2
- Report this Essay
Nowadays, public transportation has become more important. Each one of us probably used it at some stage in our lives, be it whislt catching a bus, a train or shuttle. This essay will discusses whether public transportation should be free.
First of all, free public transportation not only reduces the amount of congestion, but also decreased the amount of pollution.
free public transit would reduce the number of car on the road. For example, when people don’t have to pay for public transit. It will be less using their own car or motorbike, this not only decreased the amount of congestion, but also drop the amount of pollution. In addition, the city go green much easier, declined green house gases. However, car accidents would be reduced because of less traffic.
However, the obvious disadvantage is cost. Only rich countries could afford to introduce free public transport. Poorer countries could not possibly afford to maintain, replace and improve infrastructure or to pay workers' salaries. Therefore, some income from fares is essential. (39 words |
As a conclusion, I would prefer that the governments should make balancing among above both points of views. From one side, it should minimize the charge of using the public transports to the minimum, so everyone can ride it. Then from other side, the governments should give fare maintenance services to the public transport to ensure the safety of them and fare salaries to their associated staff to ensure better service to gain more customers. (75 words) | In conclusion, I would prefer that governments balanced both sides. They should keep fares to a minimum but ensure there is enough to provide and improve the service for commuters and residents. (32 words) |
First of all, free public transportation not only reduces the amount of congestion, but also decreased the amount of pollution.
free public transit would reduce the number of car on the road. For example, when people don’t have to pay for public transit. It will be less using their own car or motorbike, this not only decreased the amount of congestion, but also drop the amount of pollution. In addition, the city go green much easier, declined green house gases. However, car accidents would be reduced because of less traffic.
However, the obvious disadvantage is cost. Only rich countries could afford to introduce free public transport. Poorer countries could not possibly afford to maintain, replace and improve infrastructure or to pay workers' salaries. Therefore, some income from fares is essential. (39 words |
As a conclusion, I would prefer that the governments should make balancing among above both points of views. From one side, it should minimize the charge of using the public transports to the minimum, so everyone can ride it. Then from other side, the governments should give fare maintenance services to the public transport to ensure the safety of them and fare salaries to their associated staff to ensure better service to gain more customers. (75 words) | In conclusion, I would prefer that governments balanced both sides. They should keep fares to a minimum but ensure there is enough to provide and improve the service for commuters and residents. (32 words) |