t is said that public transport ought to be free of cost. In my perception, the benefits of this practice far outweigh its drawbacks because it prevents the atmosphere from toxic gases.
Admittedly, there are some drawbacks to this trend, one of them is that it increases the burden on the government. To elaborate, if public transport is offered at no cost, certainly, the government has to bear a considerable amount of the funds on the operational cost such as, wages to employees who run public buses and trains, fuel charges, and maintenance. In order to cover such expenses, the higher authorities might raise the rate of the income tax, which ultimately will be borne by its citizen.
Despite its obvious disadvantage, the merit of it far outweighs its drawback as it helps to clean the atmosphere. This is because, if public transport is made available without any charges, undoubtedly, it allows the general public to switch from their private vehicles that are the great contributor in the global warming, as it releases the harmful toxic gases into the air. Therefore, providing free public transport can surely decrease the ratio of dangerous gases and clean the climate. For example, an article by BBC News revealed that in January 1999 Singapore government enabled its citizen to use trains and buses at free of cost, and this resulted in the air of Singapore 10% fresh as compared to earlier.
In conclusion, the government has to tolerate a considerable amount of funds if bus or train services are given at free of cost. In my view, the benefit far outweighs its drawback, since it prevents the ozone layer from affecting the harmful gases.