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

Some people believe that railways should be budgeted more than roads by governments. I partially agree with this assertion; while it may be true in the case of some regions, others seem to be more in need of road construction. Ċ On the one hand, railways are the main transport systems in industrialized countries. As the need of procuring raw materials and commodities are essential for companies, railways have a main role in these countries. For example in England, Coal the main fuel for companies has been transported via railways for the past decades. Also, railways could be more beneficial in abandoned regions like deserts. Constructing and maintaining roads in left-behind parts of the world are not economically suggested. Moreover, in overpopulated countries like India, railways can replace more people at a lower price than vehicles. Ċ On the other hand, countries that are dependent on tourism are more inclined into constructing new roads. As tourists are wishing for sightseeing and experiencing road journeys it is hardly essential to construct and facilitate roads for trip purposes. Although expanding railways is cheaper than constructing roads, they are not applicable in mountainous parts of the world. In these areas like Peru or Tibbet, roads have the main responsibility for transportation. Finally, in areas with connected cities like the north of Iran, roads are more practical as the network of railways could be complicated. Ċ In conclusion, railways are the main part of the transportation system in many areas of the world, but roads are playing the leading role in other countries.