High-speed rail networks have seen success in developed country with their speed, efficiency and reliability. However, there still exists debates about whether or not the governments should focus solely on this fancy new form of public transport, or should invest more in traditional means instead. In my opinion, both should be given equal attention.
Rail networks are efficient and fast by design. They operate on tracks, are extensible by design and can carry an arbitrary amount of passengers and cargo alike. They are considerably cheaper to operate than commercial airliners, easier to maintain, all while being very reliable and safe. In addition, with recent developments in rail track technology like underground networks, rail netwoks have become a flexible and accessible mean of public transportation. In developed countries, going by rail can be the fastest, and most accessible way to arrive at a destination.
Despite the developments with rail networks, traditional public transportation methods still remain popular for a variety of reasons. They are available practically everywhere both in cities and the countryside. With modernized platforms, going by buses or motobikes can be more convenient than waiting in queue for a train. For more financially or time constrained individuals, it makes more sense to not go by train even though it can be faster in many cases.
Ultimately, all public transportation methods have their own pros and cons. The government should invest heavily in all of them equally. Minimizing the waiting time, speed, and cost for the new rail networks, and modernize public buses, drivers with new platforms to allow for schedule in advance.