Some support that it is advisable to be financed for mass transit by the government so that it can be freely used by the inhabitants. This essay vigorously opposes this perspective because it could place a massive financial burden on the state’s budget and potential decline in the quality.
To begin with, if the government allocates vast sums of money to cover the costs of mass transit, the investment in other areas will be significantly affected. This is because maintaining public transportation services involves salaries for laborers and the upkeep of various vehicles, all of which require a substantial budget. Thus, depending merely on government funding could adversely impact the financial resources invested in crucial others such as healthcare and education. For example, if the government pours half of its budget into public transport, funding for medical facilities and hospital buildings will be reduced, negatively impacting citizens’ overall well-being. The imbalance of funding allocation causes uneven development in the general prosperity of the nation.
Equally important, making public transport free could lead to the downgraded quality of mass transit due to overpopulation using it. As a result, increasing crowds make for cramped conditions, stripping away any semblance of personal space and comfort, what was once a convenient mode of transportation becomes an uncomfortable and unpleasant experience for commuters. For instance, cities like Paris and New York have reported overcrowding issues on their metro systems during rush hours, making it difficult for passengers to board and enjoy a comfortable ride. In addition, the cleanliness and upkeep of the transport system could deteriorate.
In conclusion, I emphatically deny that the government authorities should bear responsibility for covering the costs of public transport as it could put a strain on the state budget and lower the quality of these services.