With the rapid development of the urbanization, transition pathways became an important part of the economy. Some individuals believe that train transportation require more expenditure than car transportation. I concur that both fields should be given enough financial support. While railroads are needed for product conveying, car roads are imperative for the residents’ health and city growth.
On the one hand, the quality of the railways is significant for the import and export of subsides and goods. The main transportation chains in many countries include trains. They are necessary for businesses and government since they considered as a cheap and fast way of delivering. For instance, building materials like bricks, coal and sand are usually transported by rail pathways. Furthermore, the passengers mostly prefer travelling by train rather than other types of vehicles. Due to its relative safety and low cost the train transportation utilized broadly. Therefore, government should develop the rails and provide good service for its citizens. Moreover, this also attracts tourists to use trains more, hence contributing to the economy and tourism.
Roads, on the other hand, are essential for the comfortable and safe life of the residents. Without even bitumen people will struggle to ride to their workplaces, schools and houses. It will take much longer time and can result in accidents. For example, the person with bicycle risks injuring vital parts of the body because of the pits. Besides, bad quality of the roads can cause car crushes that put the life of the driver in danger. In addition, constructing of the roads lead to the infrastructure development of the city and create more opportunities for people. For instance, building asphalt path to suburbs attract businesses and customers to these regions.
In summary, it is argued whether money should be given to the rail or car pathways. Both of them play a key role in business and people’s lives, therefore, should be financed accordingly.