Part 1
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task. Write at least 250 words.
In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Samples
Words: 0
In most countries, some people believe it is essential to spend a huge amount of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others think the money should be used on improving existing public transport. I will discuss both views ahead.
To begin with, spending money on the construction of railway lines can be useful for the public to travel. The building of new tracks means an easier way of travelling. A large number of trains can provide a fast and reliable journey. For example, expanding rail tracks will allow more travelling in different cities. A large number of trains can travel after one hour, and it will be easily accessible for the public. Hence, optimization of railway tracks will provide the facility of travelling from city to city.
On the other hand, using money on existing transport can enhance the technology of transport. It is useful for the implementation of new technology. Old vehicles can be replaced by innovative vehicles to provide facilities to natives. Rebuild roads for smooth travelling and to overcome accidents. Provide more vehicles to the public so that they can travel despite the time and weather. For instance, developing countries concentrate on making smooth roads, reconstructing tracks, and providing new technology vehicles to the public to plan their journey. It helps the public with more opportunities and facilities.
Construction of new railway lines is mandatory to travel from city to city. Moreover, spending money on existing transports allows people to get more facilities and travel anytime without any fear. I believe construction of railway tracks is necessary to travel a long distance journey.
In many countries, some people argue that governments should allocate huge budgets to build high speed railway systems to connect major cities, while others think that improving presently existing public transportation systems should be the priority. In my view, investing in fast trains is essential for intercity travel, while upgrading public transport is more important within cities.
On one hand, constructing new railway lines for fast trains is important for improving intercity connectivity. High-speed railways enable people to travel between major cities quickly and comfortably, saving time for business and leisure travellers. This can boost economic growth, attract investors, and promote tourism. For instance, China’s bullet trains have greatly enhanced business opportunities between Beijing and Harbin. Moreover, such projects create thousands of construction jobs and stimulate technological advancement within the country.
On the other hand, upgrading existing public transport systems is often more practical and beneficial for the majority of citizens. Millions of people depend on buses, trams, and subways for their daily commute, especially in urban areas. Improving these services can reduce traffic congestion, air pollution, and commuting time. In contrast to high-speed trains that only benefit intercity travellers, better public transportation directly improves people’s daily lives. Furthermore, improving the existing network requires less investment and can be implemented more quickly than building new railways from scratch.
In conclusion, both approaches are good. However, I believe that developing high-speed trains is important for intercity connectivity, whereas improving current transport systems should remain a priority in urban areas.
In some countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others bellive the money should be spent on improving existing puplic transport.
On the one hand, supporters of fast trains argue that they save a lot of time for passengers. For example, people can travel from one city to another much faster, which is useful for business and tourism. In addition, modern railway lines can reduce traffic on the roads, so there will be fewer cars and less pollution. Therefore, investing in high speed trains can improve the economy and the environment.
On the other hand, some people believe that it is more important to upgrade the existing public transport. In many cities, buses and underground systems are old and uncomfortable. They are often overcrowded and not very reliable. If the government spends money on fixing these problems, more people will use public transport instead of private cars. As a result, the daily life of ordinary citizens will be better .
In conclusion, some argue that building new railway lines is necessary, while others prefer improving public transport. I believe the second option is more practical, because it benefits the majority of people in their daily life.
Some citizens in particular countries believe that constructing new railway facilities to improve the transportation system is important, even if it causes high spending for the country. Some others suggest in spending the national budget on improving transportation systems that already exist. This essay will argue both perspectives and explain why improving existing public transport is a wiser use of a country’s money.
New intercity railway constructions are necessary for helping citizens commute anywhere with ease. They provide simplicity and efficiency for people commuting from one city to another and reaching isolated areas or small towns. However, expanding the railways results in bulging national budgets, placing a financial burden to the nation. For example, it is estimated that in 2030, Indonesia will have more than $10,000,000 in debt to China due to a new railway line from the capital city of Jakarta to its nearest metropolitan city, Bandung. As a result, the Indonesian government cut most ministerial budgets to pay the debt.
On the other hand, there is existing public transport that can be improved by spending the national budget wisely. Instead of buying new trains and making new railways, the government can improve old trains’ faces and facilities, change their old spare parts to new ones, and maintain existing railways regularly. This will not only improve the safety of existing train systems; it is also environmentally friendly, as there is no need to abandon old vehicles that are most likely to end up as metal rubbish and are hardly degradable.
In conclusion, even though new railways are believed to provide advantages for people’s lives in commuting, their construction creates a huge financial burden for the nation, as it spends large sums of money. Instead, improving existing public transport is a better choice for the national budget.
This one is the sample answer in cambridge book which put 7.5 band, but engnovate gives 6.5:
In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. Sample answer: For many people around the world, the preferred method of transportation is high-speed rail. communiters travelling to and from work, rely on the safety and efficiency, which tourists appreciate the convenience and novelty that trains provide. Others believe that highways, busses and regular trains should be improved before new, high speed lines are added. Safety is cheif among concerns for those who travel to work or school on a regular basis. If one drives a case they have to concentrate on the road not only to avoid: accidents but also to prevent other drivers from causing a problem on the road: High speed rail allows the communter to leave the driving to the professional controlling the train, allowing them to get some work done while getting to work safely. In addition people tend to move further and further away from city centres, where land and houses are more affordable. High-speed rail allows these commuters to travel greater distances in a shorter amount of time. There is a low-on effect here, because if we can reduce the number of cons on the road, we can also cut down on traffic jams and rood delays. On the other hand high-speed trains are expensive, and some believe this money could be Spend on repairing motorways which are used by cars, busses and motorcycles. Another possibility would be to use this money to build more regular commenter trains and busses to service the ever-expanding urban populations. Moreover, boats and ferries could benefit from a budget which focuses more on existing forms of transport. In the end, public transport is an issue which affects us all. The taxes which we pay should be spent on the type of transport which will have the most benefit to al citizens. In addition, we need to take into account how much the environment is damaged by fossil fuels and pollution. Therefore, I believe in order to move forward, we need to embrace the idea of high-speed rail so that future generations can continue to live safely and efficiently.
hello, it seems that the scores given to the writing and speaking tasks are unrealistic compared to some weeks ago. i think the scoring system developed by your website should to be revised as soon as possible