The question of whether investors should focus more on railways rather than roadways

Government should spend money on railways rather than roads

.
To what extent do you agree or disagree

Transportation is of utmost importance to any nation's coordination. However, the question of whether investors should focus more on railways rather than roadways has incurred much debate. I agree with the idea of supporting rail-based traveling.

First and foremost, complications due to the prevalence of private automobiles can be circumvented via railroads. The growing urban population has long put a toll on cities' routes, sets off a cascade of pollution, phantom traffic jams, and road fatalities. These undesirable effects can be countered if public transportation such as subways and high-speed lines are in vogue. By easing roads' density, mass transit intrinsically reduces the release of toxic fumes, improves air quality, and prevents casualties. For instance, densely populated cities like Tokyo, New York, and London have promoted a cost-efficient system of subways that ensures hygiene, punctuality, and convenience. These cutting-edge devices have grown rapidly in quantity and quality, catering for not only customers but also the nation's environmental health.

Secondly, public transportation is a lucrative sector to invest in. By embracing nature's stability, the modern railway system cuts down the cost of environment revitalization, allocating that amount to improving its infrastructure and attracting commuters. Boosts in ticket sales then increase employees' remuneration, not to mention decimating unemployment rates, creating a flourishing image for the nation in foreign visitors' eyes while pouring interest money into investors' pockets. Railroads also act as a benefactor to customers by granting moral absolution to the ones who are environmentally concerned, providing safety and amenity at a much lower cost than road-based transportation. Viewed panoramically, promoting rail lines is a win for all concerned.

To recapitulate, surely all forms of travel have advantages worth investing in. Nevertheless, I believe the ascent of systematic railways is an all-rounded perk for society.

More familiarity with the response requirements of various prompt instructions will help the writer understand the response format requirement. Every question needs a specific response. A measured response cannot be used in an ordinary agree or disagree essay. While a measured extent response cannot be used for an ordinary agree or disagree essay either. This is the primary presentation mistake in this presentation. An ordinary response was used where an extent was specified.

Since the discussion format is incorrect but a related response was provided, the essay will recieve a portion of each scoring criteria. A full score can only be awarded when a proper response format is used. The essay might, there is no assurance that it will , recieve a base passing score.

Can anyone explain to me why this structure is wrong and what exactly I can adjust? Thank you for your help <3