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 these views and give your own opinion
The public discourse has been of two viewpoints about the superior way to spend on public transportation, one of which holds a preference for constructing high-speed railway lines between cities, whereas the other is in favor of developing current public systems of vehicles. Engrained in this essay is my partial agreement on both views.
There are a myriad of reasons why a multitude of people are convinced by directing large expenditure to construct high-speed railway lines. In Vietnam context, current public vehicles, for instance buses, do not satisfy mass requirements due to their poor and downgraded facilities, which have lasted for decades. Hence, it is high time that a new form of transportation should be adopted to attract majority's interests. High-speed trains not only meet this demand but also require a short amount of time and produces less pollution as well. However, this constructing progress requires an enormous amount of money and can be risky at the very first stages, therefore, takes a long time to be ready for mass application.
Nevertheless, others are completely against and recommend improving existing transport. It is argued that these vehicles are inexpensive and beneficial for large scale usage by citizens. Furthermore, reconstructing these would still attract people's interests in a more reasonable way. In addition to affordability, this would encourage people to use public transportation. Yet these forms of travel would not be as conducive as high-speed trains in long-distance journey.
In conclusion, spending a large amount of money whether on fast trains or existing transport both have merits and downsides. Having considered this, I firmly believe that the government should invest equally in the fast rail system and existing public transportation.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion
task 2 IELTS - railway lines vs existing transport
The public discourse has been of two viewpoints about the superior way to spend on public transportation, one of which holds a preference for constructing high-speed railway lines between cities, whereas the other is in favor of developing current public systems of vehicles. Engrained in this essay is my partial agreement on both views.
There are a myriad of reasons why a multitude of people are convinced by directing large expenditure to construct high-speed railway lines. In Vietnam context, current public vehicles, for instance buses, do not satisfy mass requirements due to their poor and downgraded facilities, which have lasted for decades. Hence, it is high time that a new form of transportation should be adopted to attract majority's interests. High-speed trains not only meet this demand but also require a short amount of time and produces less pollution as well. However, this constructing progress requires an enormous amount of money and can be risky at the very first stages, therefore, takes a long time to be ready for mass application.
Nevertheless, others are completely against and recommend improving existing transport. It is argued that these vehicles are inexpensive and beneficial for large scale usage by citizens. Furthermore, reconstructing these would still attract people's interests in a more reasonable way. In addition to affordability, this would encourage people to use public transportation. Yet these forms of travel would not be as conducive as high-speed trains in long-distance journey.
In conclusion, spending a large amount of money whether on fast trains or existing transport both have merits and downsides. Having considered this, I firmly believe that the government should invest equally in the fast rail system and existing public transportation.
