All Public Transport in Our Cities Should Be Free
In most cities, public transport is partially subsidized by the city council, which means that bus and underground fares are usually reasonably low. However, some people argue that fares should be abolished altogether . In this essay, I intend to examine the arguments for and against free public transport. One of the strongest arguments in favour of free public transport is that it would encourage more people to use the buses and tubes instead of going by car. Consequently, there would be less traffic in the roads, which would make our cities safer, cleaner and generally presenter places to live in. Another advantage is that those who are not very well off would be able to afford to go out more and would have little more money to spend, which would improve the quality of their lives. Free public transport would be a good thing for a city’s shops and businesses, as bus and underground users would have more money available to spend on both necessities and luxuries. Lastly, if passengers travel free on public transport, there would be no need for ticket officers, bus conductors or ticket inspectors. This would make the buses and underground much cheaper to run. On the other hand, there are several arguments against abolishing fares. To begin with, if there were no fares, the city council would have to find another way of financing public transport, probably by increasing the city’s rates. As a result, a lot of people who never travel by public transport would be helping to pay for a service which they do not use, which many would consider unfair and which also make these people worse off. What is more, if the number of passengers increased dramatically because of the abolition of fares, it would probably be necessary to increase the number of buses and trains. This would make free public transport even more expensive to operate. Finally, the abolishion of fares would lead to the loss of several...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document