Many people believe that rather than railways, the authorities should invest their money on roads

Government should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extend do you agree or disagree

Many people believe that rather than railways, the authorities should invest their money on roads, others believe that railways are the ones to be spent money on because of their benefits to many aspects in human life.

On the one hand, it is undeniable that transport has an important role to play in the economy and residents' daily life. Due to the escalation in population, the need for traveling increases significantly, which has resulted in frequent rush hour traffic jams. Traffic jams affect many aspects such as people are getting late from their work, the rotations of goods decrease in particular and the economy develops slowly as a result. Yet, investing in road infrastructure is nowhere near easing traffic flow on road during peak hours, another alternative solution is to put money on upgrading the railway system.

I believe that developing railways' infrastructure will bring more pros rather than cons. Firstly, railways are usually connected with every destination in cities, which enables residents to have access to desired locations. Plus, using trains can speed up journey times, compared to buses, trains are environmentally friendly and much cheaper when traveling on a long journey. Most importantly, using trains can cope with traffic congestion during rush hours. Take Ho Chi Minh city as an example, it is well-known for a hustle and bustle places with a dense population. Therefore, roads at peak hours are getting worse even though huge funds have been poured annually with a view to upgrading road transport provision. However, non-significant ramification has been spotted. Thus, the authorities had decided to invest in railway facilities, the metro railway is anticipated to be put into use to ease the burden in road traffic.

In conclusion, while the investment in roads can somehow improve the traffic's issues, yet, its benefits can not outweigh the advantages that railways bring to people.

The writer has not provided an extent response as representative of his opinion as required for the restatement + response paragraph. That paragraph is incomplete as it does not properly deliver an appropriate version of the original. The thesis statement is completely missing so there is no acceptable opinion stated at the start. That is a TA failure.

Rather than a single opinion response explaining an extent opinion, the writer has used a comparative general and personal opinion format. A prompt discussion change that highlights the degree of low English understanding on the writer's part. His comprehension skills are weak and he is incapable of functioning as expected in an English academic setting. He will fail the test.