As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think the government should pay for this. Others, however, think that the divers should cover the costs. Discuss both views and give your opinion hay nhất giúp bạn có thêm tài liệu tham khảo để viết bài luận bằng Tiếng Anh hay hơn.

Đề bài: As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think the government should pay for this. Others, however, think that the divers should cover the costs. Discuss both views and give your opinion

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think - mẫu 1

Some today have argued that the funding for road systems should be the responsibility of governments instead of individuals. In my opinion, although maintaining roads can be considered a public service, private motorists should pay in order to more generally benefit society.

Proponents of governments assuming road costs argue this is a basic service tax-payers expect. In all countries, working adults must pay a certain percentage of their monthly salary to the government. From these contributions, individuals justly feel entitled to a variety of public services ranging from police and fire departments to affordable hospitals and safe infrastructure. Roads are a key component of this contract as most people drive in order to go to work, see friends, and take holidays. The government will itself benefit not only from fulfilling this mandate but also in terms of the financial byproduct of consumers being outside actively contributing to a market economy.

However, forcing drivers to pay these costs will greatly discourage private automobile ownership. This disincentive is crucial today because cities are overcrowded, and private vehicles contribute to rising pollution levels. In large cities such as New York City and Tokyo, it is nearly impossible to traverse the city by automobile at peak rush hours. If there were fewer cars on the road, then people could travel more freely on bicycles, on foot, and using public transportation. Additionally, private vehicles are inefficient. Other forms of travel leave relatively small carbon footprints but cars, often carrying only one or two passengers, use more petrol than would normally be required to transport people. Replace cars with more efficient transport options and there would be a marked decrease in the consumption of fossil fuels.

In conclusion, despite the strong argument that tax-payers deserve public infrastructure such as roads, it is more important to discourage individuals from purchasing cars. In the long term, this will greatly benefit cities and the world as a whole.

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think - mẫu 2

The exponential proliferation of automobiles mandates considerable investment in road infrastructure. Although some contend that the onus of these expenditures should rest upon the government, others argue that drivers should share the financial responsibility. Both perspectives present compelling rationales, yet I believe that a combined effort encompassing both governmental entities and drivers is crucial for sustaining road systems.

On one hand, advocates of government funding for road systems posit the broader societal benefits of well-maintained infrastructure. To brief, roads are a public good that facilitates commerce, trade, and interconnectedness, contributing to economic prosperity. By allocating tax revenue to road construction and maintenance, the governing bodies ensure that all citizens can access safe and efficient transportation networks.

On the other hand, opponents contend that those who directly utilize the road system should share the financial burden. Enforcing tolls, congestion levies, or fuel tariffs allows drivers to contribute commensurate with their usage, ensuring a fair and proportionate allocation of costs. This approach also incentivizes individuals to opt for sustainable transportation options, reducing traffic congestion and environmental impact.

In my opinion, an integrative strategy that synergizes governmental funding with driver contributions is optimal. While governments play a pivotal role in upholding equitable access to road systems - particularly in economically disadvantaged regions, drivers should partake in the upkeep of the infrastructure they rely on as this promotes conscientious and sustainable usage.

In conclusion, despite the fiscal obligation for road systems involves a nuanced interplay between governmental allocations and motorists' contributions, I firmly accord that by striking a harmonious balance between these approaches, societies can achieve impeccably upheld, efficient, and sustainable transportation frameworks that yield benefits for both individuals and the broader community.

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think - mẫu 3

Opinions diverge widely on who should be responsible for road maintenance costs due to the proliferation of private cars recently. While some people argue that those who use cars should shoulder the responsibility for the improvement of road systems, I believe that such costs should be the liability of the government.

The principal reason why car commuters should take the responsibility for these costs stems from their overuse of roads. Compared to other means of transport like a motorcycle, a car obviously not only occupies much more road space, but also wears the roads more due to its larger size and weight. It was estimated in Thailand in 2015 that the number of private cars made up nearly 85% of total vehicles commuting on the roads to and from work. As a result, the need for the expansion and enhancement of roads is mainly to facilitate a more comfortable journey for car users. Therefore, it is reasonable to assign the costs to car owners to pay for the maintenance and enhancement of the infrastructure.

However, I believe that the expenditure for road infrastructure projects should be incurred by the government for the following reasons. Firstly, the main role of governments is to improve the citizens’ standard of living, and an efficient transportation system is just one of the residents’ basic needs. In fact, the efficiency of road transport is the backbone of a country’s economy, and therefore it would be wrong if governments did not give this top priority. Secondly, as in many countries, car buyers are charged an exorbitant amount of tax in order to own and drive a car on roads, and therefore it is unfair to solely lay the responsibility for road upgrade works on them. For example, people in Vietnam have to pay almost twice as much to own a car than in other countries since taxes and fees account for 40-50% of car prices. Therefore, it is better to use these taxes for road infrastructure investment, rather than forcing citizens to pay for it.

In conclusion, although the argument in favor of road infrastructure costs belonging to car owners might be convincing to some extent, I think that the government should be the one to take the full responsibility for this.

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think - mẫu 4

Roads are indispensable for an effective transportation system for the public. Though there are other modes of transportation, the road system occupies the paramount place due to its convenience and less cost. Some people think that the government should pay for the road system, while others are of the view that drivers or car owners should be responsible for it. This essay examines both these aspects.

On the one hand, there are some grounds to support the view that drivers should pay on the road system. Firstly, drivers will become more responsible. That is, if they have to pay for road transport, it creates the feeling of ‘ours’ and as a result, they avoid harsh driving and become more concerned about roads. Another important benefit is that it may cause a decline in the number of drivers. To make it clearer, when drivers should pay for the road system, people depend on public transport in order to reduce financial loss. Hence the number of private vehicles decreases.

On the other hand, it is quite easy to understand the reasons for the government should pay on the road system. Primarily, it is the responsibility of the government to spend money on the road system. Because the public pay tax amount and this money should be used for their development itself. Secondly, if the government is responsible, it leads to a wide range of developments and aids in communication and transportation in the public and national prosperity is the end product. Moreover, the government can use modern technology as large-scale projects in order to improve the road system and in turn it helps the public. In addition, people can reduce the burden on them when a government spends on these public activities.

To conclude, when we weigh both aspects, it is crystal clear that the government can spend more effectively and efficiently for the road system rather than the drivers. But every person should work hand in hand and along with authority to maintain proper transportation methods.

As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think - mẫu 5

In today's society, as the number of vehicles continues to increase, there is a growing need to allocate funds for road infrastructure. While some argue that the costs of road maintenance should be borne by drivers, I believe that it is the government's responsibility to cover these expenses.

There are several compelling reasons why the government should be responsible for funding road systems. Firstly, as the entity in charge of overall infrastructure, the government must ensure that roads are managed and maintained properly, as their condition directly affects the safety and lives of individuals, particularly in the case of car accidents. Moreover, by investing in road maintenance, the government is not only benefiting drivers but also ensuring the efficient functioning of other important services such as public transportation and school buses. Lastly, well-maintained road systems can attract tourists, promoting economic growth and portraying the country as a developed nation with practical and safe transportation networks.

On the other hand, it is argued that drivers should bear the costs of road infrastructure since the government has already invested in basic road systems. However, the increased number of vehicles necessitates expanding and repairing roads more frequently, as well as hiring additional employees for maintenance. Without requiring additional taxes from drivers for road infrastructure, the government's limited budget would have to be allocated towards roads, potentially leading to a lack of support for other societal needs. By having drivers contribute through additional taxes, the government can allocate its budget more efficiently, such as to operate more school buses or repair old and damaged infrastructure.

In conclusion, while it is true that drivers directly benefit from road systems, it is crucial to consider the overall convenience they provide to citizens and the tourism industry. Therefore, I firmly believe that the responsibility and costs associated with road infrastructure should be shouldered by the government.

Xem thêm các bài luận Tiếng Anh hay khác:

• Some people say that it is possible for a country to be both economically successful and have a clean environment. Others disagree. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

• Space travel has been possible for some time and some people believe that space tourism could be developed in the future. Do you think it is a positive or negative development?

• The animal species are becoming extinct due to human activities on land and in sea. What are the reasons and solutions?

• Some people believe that individuals are born with leadership skills. Others say that these skills can be developed with experience. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

• Solving environmental problems should be the responsibility of an international organization rather than each national government. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

---