Allocate money in railway lines or existing public transport. Discuss both view give opinion

bigger budget for trains or for public roads?

In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.

Discuss both of these views and give your opinion.

In modern times, many countries around the world have improved their transportation for citizens to commute to work and study. While there are others who advocate for the government to allocate the majority of the budget to creating more railway lines for fast trains to travel between cities, some believe that the money should be use to improve the current public transport. In my opinion, creating new railway lines for trains to travel will benefit society in the long term.

On the one hand, people want to improve existing public transport for various reasons but mainly for its affordable price. Public transport does not require a large amount of fuel in order to transport people to their desired destination, which means the cost to travel with public transport will be less than a train ticket. Hence, more people would use public transport. For instance, in Vietnam, a bus ticket only cost around 20.000 dong to 50.000 dong to travel.

On the other hand, I believe that constructing railway lines for fast train will be more beneficial in the long run. Firstly, increase job opportunities. Many people are searching for jobs that are around their city, which can limit their job search. With the construction of new railway lines, fast trains will be able to transport people to a different city with little amount of time cost. Thus, increase the range that they can get a job since they can travel to a different city with no time lost. For example, a person can travel to Hanoi to work or study and go back to their home back in Ho Chi Minh city. Secondly, reduce air pollution. A train can carry a large sum of passengers per travel, which means it will exhaust fewer fumes for travel. As a result, it will improve the air quality in the city.

In conclusion, some people want the government to use the nations budgets to create railway lines for fast trains, while others think the money should be use to improve the current public transport. I believe that the construction of new railway lines will be more beneficial for the future.

The essay is too wordy for a task that needs to be completed within 40 minutes. This should not be more than 300 words long. It would help the author to learn how to use concise wording in the future. That is because the explanations do not need to be lengthy. It should just be long enough to justify the writer's opinion. Avoid long sentences since these run-on presentations make the essay more prone to unintentional C + C and GRA errors. This is one time where a shorter presentation would be better for the score. 275 is the ideal word length.

I noticed that the supporting reason for the writer's opinion was (accidentally) placed as the opening sentence. In an actual test, that misplacement would result in a scoring markdown. To properly earn a score for that statement, it should accompany the personal opinion representation. That way it helps add to the accuracy considerations.

The essay itself is not completely formatted as it does not clearly discuss the public vis-a-vis the personal opinion. Group pronoun usage to help explain the common opinion reasons prior to the writer's view must be indicated in relation to C + C and GRA scores. The clarity of the discussion is lost without these pronoun references.

Several other shortcomings in this presentation are also present but unfortunately, cannot be accomodated in this thread. A private consultation may benefit the exam taker in relation to increased scoring potential.