Opinions diverge when it comes to the investment in urban infrastructure to solve traffic problems in today’s society. While some put an emphasis on its effectiveness in resolving, others highlight that there are other ways to do it instead of this solution. This essay will discuss both perspectives before affirming the superiority of the former notion.
On the one hand, advocates for using other alternatives argue that this can be achieved by imposing taxes on every car owner. Perhaps, they believe that this way can make vehicles unaffordable to some people, causing fewer individuals to buy cars. As a consequence, the number of cars will significantly decrease, curbing traffic congestion and its problems can be resolved. However, I believe that this way contains some particular impacts, negatively affecting some citizens. Indeed, because of the declined number of vehicles, many car manufacturers have to produce fewer products, which makes a myriad of people run the risk of unemployment.
Notwithstanding the aforementioned argument, proponents of enhancing and advancing city infrastructure underscore its efficiency in conferring a high quality traffic system. As a matter of fact, by building underground railway systems or investing in public transportation, these help people conveniently move to other destinations instead of using private vehicles, this reduces the general traffic problems. This sentiment finds resonance in Japan, where supersonic trains are highly developed for residents, and the number of traffic problems have plummeted in recent years. If this does not materialize, many will be struggling with different unnecessary situations.
To recapitulate, while there are other ways to solve this problem by imposing taxes, investing in urban infrastructure not only offers a better experience and service to residents but also effectively mitigates its potential drawbacks. It is therefore recommended authorities should prioritize long-term investment in transport infrastructure