There is an ongoing debate on authorities providing transportation to citizens at no cost to mitigate gridlock and pollution; Some propose these would be expensive discouraging private companies. While it may be costly for the government, I strongly believe its benefits of reduction in traffic jam and air pollutant cannot be overemphasized. This essay will focus on both views.
In most metropolitan areas, traffic congestion is a major problem which can be drastically reduced with the provision of free public transportation. For instance, in countries like the United Kingdom and United States, the government made provision for such, thus, decreasing the number of private vehicles on the road. Consequently, reducing the amount of pollutant generated from car exhaust. As a result, better air quality is inhaled.
On the other hand, opponent contend that provision of transport at no cost increases governemental spending while discouraging investment from private firms. They argue that money spent on these transport system can rather be allocated towards better infastructure like healthcare and road network. In addition, due to reduction in privately owned cars, companies invest less on cars because there will be little patronage. For example, car dealership companies will operate at a loss as a result of less people patronising them.
In conclusion, although the government will incur more cost, I believe that the benefits of better air quality and lesser traffic congestion is more productive to the individual and community.