Prompt: Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. to what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Few individuals contend that the loin share of the government transportation budget must be allocated for railways instead of roads. On the other hand, people advocate that a better infrastructure of roads plays significant roles in the prosperity of a nation but actually, there are certain pros and cons of both strategies. I believe that the spending on mass transit services like railways, and subways have more gains than on roads. Ċ To begin with, there are a few positives of funding roads and highways. Improved roads provide easy access to hospitals, schools and universities for the residents of remote areas where mega transportation projects are not feasible. This development will improve the lifestyle of the dwellers in those localities such as rural people will earn more money by selling their products directly in urban markets. Furthermore, it can prevent metropolitans to be overpopulated, as people would have a convenient approach to all amenities due to efficient roads. Ċ On the contrary, there are enormous advantages to promote railways. First and foremost, trains can significantly decline the emission of greenhouse gases which would make the environment cleaner. For instance, the number of vehicles would be reduced on roads when people use trains for the commit to work, that would decrease the noise level and environmental pollution in cities. Secondly, as travelling by trains is very cost-effective as compared to cars , so it can save a handsome amount of money for people every month. Ċ In conclusion, I think that even though an efficient roads network enhances the mobility of citizens, it can lead to devastating consequences like pollution, and traffic issues. The merits of spending on railways are far more than funding roads.