You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Write about the following topic:
Some people think governments should spend money on faster means of public transport. However, others think money should be spent on other priorities.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experiences.
You should write at least 250 words.
Model Essay 1
Some argue that governments should prioritize funding for faster public transport systems, while others believe resources should be allocated to pressing concerns like affordability and environmental protection. In my opinion, while rapid public transport can boost urban efficiency, focusing on cost-effectiveness and sustainability has far greater long-term benefits. This essay will discuss both perspectives and explain why prioritizing affordability and environmental conservation is essential.
On the one hand, investing in faster public transport systems can significantly reduce travel time and improve urban productivity. High-speed rail networks and advanced metro systems enable commuters to reach their destinations swiftly, facilitating economic growth by enhancing workforce mobility. For instance, Japan's Shinkansen trains have revolutionized transportation, enabling faster business transactions and seamless intercity commutes. Additionally, quicker public transit can reduce reliance on personal vehicles, subsequently alleviating traffic congestion. However, such projects often involve exorbitant costs, which might divert resources from addressing other critical social needs, such as education, healthcare, or poverty alleviation. Therefore, while beneficial, faster public transport may not always deliver proportional value compared to its financial outlay.
On the other hand, prioritizing affordability and environmental sustainability has broader societal and ecological benefits. Affordable public transport ensures accessibility for all income groups, encouraging its widespread use and alleviating urban inequalities. For example, subsidized public buses in countries like Brazil have allowed low-income communities to access employment and education opportunities. Moreover, environmentally sustainable transport systems, such as electric buses or bicycle-sharing programs, significantly reduce carbon emissions and mitigate air pollution. As climate change becomes an existential threat, governments must allocate funds to eco-friendly alternatives rather than focusing solely on speed. These investments benefit not only current generations but also ensure a liveable planet for future ones.
In conclusion, while faster public transport improves convenience and economic productivity, prioritizing affordability and environmental sustainability offers more substantial long-term advantages. Thus, rather than solely emphasizing speed, greater focus should be placed on cost-effective and eco-conscious solutions to tackle today’s most critical challenges.
Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner
Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score
Model Essay 2
The debate over whether governments should invest in faster public transportation or prioritize affordability and environmental sustainability is multifaceted. While faster transit can boost productivity and reduce congestion, affordability and environmental impact are critical concerns that cannot be overlooked. In my opinion, a balanced approach that improves transportation speed while also addressing cost and sustainability issues is essential for a comprehensive and effective public transportation system.
Proponents of investing in faster public transportation argue that it can significantly enhance economic productivity and improve quality of life. A quicker commute means that people spend less time traveling and more time on productive activities, whether at work or with family. For instance, in bustling metropolitan areas like New York or Tokyo, faster subways and buses could reduce traffic congestion, allowing businesses to operate more efficiently and reducing the stress levels of commuters. Moreover, the convenience of swift travel options can encourage more people to use public transport instead of personal vehicles, potentially reducing road traffic and associated accidents. These benefits make a strong case for governments to focus on modernizing and speeding up public transportation systems.
On the other hand, focusing exclusively on speed overlooks significant concerns related to affordability and environmental sustainability. Many low-income individuals rely on public transportation as their primary means of getting around. If investments in speed result in higher fares, this could disproportionately impact the very people who depend on these services the most. For example, in cities where fare increases have been implemented to fund infrastructure improvements, the burden has often fallen hardest on the lower-income population. Additionally, the environmental consequences of focusing solely on faster transport cannot be ignored. High-speed systems typically require more energy, which could lead to higher carbon emissions unless governments also invest in green technologies. Addressing environmental concerns, such as reducing air pollution and mitigating global warming, is crucial, especially when considering the long-term health and financial costs of environmental degradation.
In conclusion, while the advantages of faster public transport, such as improved efficiency and reduced congestion, are significant, governments must also consider the broader implications of affordability and environmental sustainability. Therefore, a balanced approach that addresses both the need for speed and the importance of accessibility and environmental protection is essential for creating a truly effective public transportation system.
Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score
Model Essay 3
Some are of the opinion that governments should allocate money to make public transportation system faster. Although this policy might help individuals to be more efficient and enhance their productivity, issues such as the affordability of public transportation and environmental concerns should be prioritized due to their larger and more severe impact.
Those in favour of investing more in faster forms of public transportation point out that this policy can boost productivity and efficiency of the general public. In other words, by spending less time on a train, bus, or in a taxi, not only do people have more time for their other daily activities, but they will have more energy to perform better. Consider, for example, a worker who is spending half of the time they used to spend on the way to get to their office. This way, they can allocate that extra time to their work. Moreover, a student who can get to their school within a shorter period of time will potentially be more energetic as being in an enclosed place while moving, like on a train, can result in headache and sometimes vomiting.
However, the impact of high- speed public transport on citizens’ system pales in comparison with that of more pressing issues like its affordability and environmental issues. A commuter can make the most of their time spent on the train or in a bus by socializing with others or listening to a professional podcast related to their work. However, with unreasonably high public transportation fares, they might no longer be able to use them, especially in the long term. This is because the largest group dependent on public transport is the lower-income population, whose lives and options are affected with little price fluctuations. Furthermore, environmental pressing issues like air pollution and global warming are threatening people’s health dramatically. Air pollution can cause cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and even premature death for vulnerable groups like the elderly and children. This also puts a financial strain on the healthcare system as more people need to be hospitalized. In another case, about 47,000 people died in the last summer in Europe as a result of extreme heat waves, which arise from global warming.
In conclusion, while faster modes of public transportation can benefit people’s lives by increasing their energy level and freeing up more time for them, there are other urgent problems like the cost of public transportation fares and environmental issues that can reduce people’s purchasing power and deteriorate public health. Therefore, governments should direct more of their budget towards large – scale pressing issues.
Model Essay 4
Some would argue that public sectors should allocate expenditure on high-speed public transportation, while others say that funds should be distributed to other primary objectives such as environment. While other objectives like environment are important to protect one nation’s biodiversity, I believe that investing in high-speed public transport directly improves people’s quality of living.
On the one hand, allocating funds in environment helps nations protect biodiversity. The reason is sufficient budgets can be used for the legislation on governing people not to damage the habitats of wildlife, sending enforcement to prevent endangered species from hunting, and allowing scientists to breed endangered wild animals. A case in point is the increase in number of the Taiwanese Black Bear, as the Taiwan government spent a substantial amount of money to protect the forests where they live and to breed them in national zoos. However, I believe that ordinary people do not benefit from the increase in biodiversity directly as much as they do from high-speed public transport.
On the other hand, fast public transportation systems significantly benefit people’s everyday lives. This is because individuals can have more time for leisure and engage in other productive activities, instead of spending time on commute. Moreover, individuals can choose to reside in a location that is much far away from their workplace and enjoy a lower house price. For instance, the Taiwan High-speed Railway allows people to easily travel from the north of Taiwan to the south in a short period of time, resulting in many office workers in Taipei relocating to suburban areas like Taoyuan, which has rental prices almost a half of that in Taipei. I believe this is more preferable because fast public transports directly improve individuals’ quality of lives to a significant extent.
In conclusion, although distributing funds in objectives such as environment helps biodiversity, government authorities should put high-seed public transportation systems as the priority, because it influences the lives of the majority of people directly and significantly.
Model Essay 5
In the modern era, the debate on whether government expenditure should prioritize the acceleration of public transport systems or channel funds into other significant areas remains contentious. Advocates of enhanced public transportation argue for its efficiency and environmental benefits, while opponents urge a focus on alternative priorities such as healthcare and education. This essay explores both perspectives, ultimately endorsing the balanced allocation of resources.
Proponents of investing in faster public transport systems emphasize the multifaceted advantages it brings. Primarily, it significantly reduces commute times, enabling individuals to dedicate more time to personal and professional pursuits, thereby enhancing productivity and quality of life. Moreover, rapid transit options such as high-speed trains and electric buses offer a greener alternative to private vehicles, mitigating carbon emissions and combatting urban air pollution. For instance, the introduction of the Shinkansen in Japan has not only revolutionized travel within the country but has also set a global benchmark for efficient and sustainable public transportation.
Conversely, critics argue that government funds should address more pressing societal needs. The augmentation of healthcare services, educational facilities, and affordable housing, they contend, would have a more immediate and profound impact on the populace's well-being. An investment in these sectors is seen as foundational, ensuring a healthier, more educated society capable of contributing effectively to economic growth and social stability. The case of Scandinavian countries, where extensive investment in social services has resulted in high levels of societal well-being, underscores this argument.
In summary, investing in faster public transport has clear merits, yet it's imperative to balance this with enhancements in social services. A holistic strategy that values both infrastructure and societal health is key to a progressive society. Effective resource allocation can ensure transport improvements complement, rather than overshadow, essential social needs.
Model Essay 6
The question of optimal governmental expenditure, especially between enhancing public transportation speeds and addressing alternative societal demands, is a polarizing issue. This essay argues for a nuanced investment strategy that considers both the immediate benefits of swift public transport and the long-term advantages of funding other essential services. It will explore the tangible impacts of both investment paths on society's progress and well-being.
On one hand, accelerating public transportation infrastructure can significantly ease daily commutes, markedly reducing travel time and environmental strain. For instance, cities like Seoul have witnessed a remarkable transformation in urban mobility and a substantial reduction in carbon footprints following the expansion of their efficient, high-speed public transport networks. This development not only improves individual productivity but also contributes to the broader goal of sustainable urban development. Moreover, enhanced public transport systems can stimulate economic growth by improving access to jobs and education, illustrating a direct, tangible benefit to societal advancement and fostering a more interconnected urban environment.
Conversely, allocating funds to sectors such as health, education, and housing addresses fundamental human needs and rights, laying a solid foundation for a resilient and educated populace. Investments in these areas can lead to long-term societal benefits, including higher life expectancy, reduced inequality, and a more skilled workforce, thus nurturing a stronger, more equitable society. For example, countries like Finland, which prioritize education and healthcare, consistently enjoy high standards of living and social cohesion, demonstrating the profound, lasting impact of such investments on societal health and stability, and setting a global benchmark for social welfare.
In summary, the benefits of rapid public transport are clear, yet the critical need for health, education, and housing investment remains paramount. A strategic, balanced resource allocation between these priorities is essential for a holistic and sustainable societal development, ensuring progress in infrastructure does not overshadow fundamental social services.
Model Essay 7
In the contemporary debate on governmental allocation of funds, opinions diverge between enhancing public transport systems and addressing alternative priorities. This essay advocates for the strategic investment in public transportation, arguing that its benefits in reducing urban congestion and boosting economic productivity outweigh financial and environmental concerns. These pivotal areas—traffic alleviation and economic enhancement, alongside counterarguments, will be explored.
The first significant advantage of investing in public transportation is its profound capacity to alleviate urban congestion. By offering a viable and efficient alternative to private vehicles, cities can experience a dramatic decrease in traffic volumes, leading to markedly shorter travel times and significantly lower stress levels for daily commuters. This shift not only enhances the urban living experience but also contributes to a healthier environment. For instance, cities like Copenhagen have seen a marked improvement in traffic flow and a substantial decrease in pollution levels after expanding their innovative bike-sharing program, illustrating the potential of well-thought-out public transport initiatives to transform urban environments into more livable and sustainable spaces.
Furthermore, the economic benefits of an efficient public transport system are manifold and substantial. An accessible and reliable network can significantly enhance productivity by reducing the time workers spend commuting, thus increasing the available workforce and stimulating economic growth. This dynamic has a ripple effect on the economy, fostering job creation and attracting businesses. For example, the introduction of high-speed rail services in regions has been shown to boost local economies by improving access to jobs and widening the labor market, thereby attracting more businesses and investment. Such infrastructure investments not only benefit the immediate area but also have the potential to rejuvenate surrounding regions, demonstrating the extensive economic advantages of public transportation developments.
In conclusion, investing in public transport is a judicious use of government funds, significantly easing congestion and spurring economic growth. Despite financial and environmental hurdles, innovative and sustainable solutions can mitigate these concerns, underscoring the essential role of public transport in contemporary urban development.
Model Essay 8
While there is a contingent that believes government expenditure should be prioritized for the development of high-speed public transportation, others argue for the diversion of these resources to other critical concerns, such as cost reduction and environmental preservation. Although faster transportation can certainly enhance citizens' quality of life by diminishing commute times, my conviction lies in addressing more pressing transport issues, including the escalating costs and the environmental ramifications.
The reduction in travel time can indeed have a profound societal impact. By decreasing time spent on buses, trains, or trams, urban dwellers can gain additional leisure time, providing opportunities to spend more time with family, engage in recreational activities or even pursue side-lined interests due to time constraints. This could lead to an overall enhancement of societal well-being. A prime example of this is Hong Kong's high-speed rail system, which has significantly reduced travel times and is highly appreciated by the populace.
However, while the issue of slow journeys is certainly a significant concern governments aim to tackle, there are other equally pressing problems that demand attention, such as spiralling transportation costs and their contribution to global warming. It is incumbent upon us to divert public resources towards the development of eco-friendly transportation, which can help reduce our carbon footprint and contain transportation costs. For instance, the introduction of electric buses or solar-powered railways not only aids in the conservation of the natural environment but also allows the government to allocate financial resources to other pressing matters such as mental health and elderly care issues.
In conclusion, while the benefits of reduced commute times cannot be ignored, the potentially negative implications associated with cost and environmental degradation must also be taken into account. It is within the government's purview to introduce measures to manage costs effectively and implement environmentally friendly practices for public transportation. In doing so, we can ensure that citizens are able to complete their journeys in a manner that is both financially and ecologically sustainable.