If countries are serious about solving traffic problems, they should tax private cars very heavily and use the money to provide free or very cheap rail travel. In what extent do you agree or disagree? Write in no less than 250 words and give relevant examples from your own experiences

If countries are serious about solving traffic problems, they should tax private cars very heavily and use the money to provide free or very cheap rail travel. In what extent do you agree or disagree? Write in no less than 250 words and give relevant examples from your own experiences

The common perception that prohibitively taxing on personal four wheelers and using the revenues raised to afford economical, or free of cost rail commute can help mitigate challenges posed by thickening traffic density is bolstered and contested strongly. 

The success of this policy is predicted by those assuming such an arrangement would act as a disincentive for the most of the populace  against using  their private modes of transportation. Vehicle owners would think twice before using their vehicles, and affordable or free of cost train rides would act as a persuasion to switch. Such pilot projects have been carried out in cities like Tokyo wherein, levying charges on private conveyance and lowered train tickets  have been able to convince several urban dwellers to utilize train services while abandoning their own means of commuting.  

Having said that, the proposal is prone to failure in most regions and people are bond to suffer if such a policy is enacted owing to the inadequately equipped public transport network: trains cannot reach all the places since some regions and locality are bound to remain out of bounds of railways, forcing people to use their own vehicles dampening the objective of such a benign strategy.

Besides this, rail commutes will rarely be accessible during wee hours, and also remain a cause  of concern of safety for the elderly, women and children; consequently, overtaxing might impose an additional burden on car owners, but it is likely to fail to prove a panacea for  traffic and pollution woes.  

Overall,  disputes aside, even though such a policy presents a rosy picture, the ground reality is far from being true; the poor condition of rail transit systems across the world make it impractical for most to use it as their primary mode of traversing.  

If countries are serious about solving traffic problems, they should tax private cars very heavily and use the money to provide free or very cheap rail travel. In what extent do you agree or disagree? Write in no less than 250 words and give relevant examples from your own experiences.

If countries are serious about solving traffic problems, they should tax private cars very heavily and use the money to provide free or very cheap rail travel. In what extent do you agree or disagree? Write in no less than 250 words and give relevant examples from your own experiences

 

Ielts Essay - If countries are serious about solving traffic problems, they should tax private cars very heavily and use the money to provide free or very cheap rail travel

Taxing personal four wheelers and funding subsidized rail travel from the revenues grossed from such levies, to keep a check on the traffic chaos, has emerged as a potent solution. Despite many lobbying for such a policy, there are voices of  dissent. 

Imposing higher taxes on the car ownership seems to be the only way of dissuading use of personal automobiles. If car users are made to shell out charges, it would become nearly impossible for many to bear the cost of owning a vehicle, which would eventually cause disenchantment from possessing one; thus helping reduce burden on the roads and alleviating congestion.

Moreover, it is often argued, when every citizen is paying taxes to the state, why should the majority suffer for the sake of a minority interest and face jams. Extra levies on personal cars could even out the things.  Any extra revenue generated could help authorities address concerns of major part of populace, and lay subsidized  or free  public transport network the disposal of people. Such a move could also act a stimulus for the ones having their personal vehicles, to use public transport.

However, there are those who term this idea as ludicrous. Offering subsidized railway services at the cost of four wheelers may seem to be a good alternative, but it is surely impractical since trains cannot cater to all the areas effectively. This would only put those, who cannot access train services conveniently, at the receiving end since individuals, with no alternative but cars to their satisfy their commuting requirements, would be overburdened by costs of commuting, and heavy levies on automobiles.  

Henceforth, notwithstanding popular belief of taxing personal vehicles to subsidize rail travel, I have all the reasons to believe that such policy would fetch little success.