This essay will focus on some of the advantages and disadvantages of public transportation. First of all, I’d like to talk about the advantages of public transportation. Using public transportation can reduce the number of people who drive their own cars. It can ease traffic jams and improve road conditions. We can also reduce air pollution by using public transportation. Public transportation can accommodate a lot of people and send them to various destinations. It leads to the reduction of harmful emissions gasses such as carbon dioxide.
On the other hand, we have some disadvantages associated with public transportation. Using an automobile is more accessible than public transportation when we live in the countryside. In most cases, there are few busses, trains, and taxes in there. It’s very inconvenient for local people. If they have their own cars, they can drive anytime and anywhere. What’s more, it’s tough for elderly people to use public transportation. They have to go up and down the stairs when they use public transportation. There are many stations that don’t have elevators or escalators in Japan. In my opinion, I can’t live without a public train because I can get to the office in time. At any rate, public transportation is essential for our daily life.
Prices start at $12
Prices start at $11
Prices start at $10
Automobiles play a major role in today’s society. Almost every American owns at least one motorized transportation vehicle. Some say they make our lives better by reaching places faster than before. Others say they are harmful to the environment. Have they made our society better or worse? They may be fast but do we as humans want our environment to suffer because of time. Face it, cars pollute. And they release destructive chemicals into the air. Air pollution can threaten the health of many subjects in the environment including human beings. Pollution is a major problem for all of us. People need to recognize this situation so we can start making a difference to this problem. This would then decrease air pollution. There are many forms of public transportation such as buses, trains, airplanes, trolleys, subways, and many more. Today these transits are not as widely used as they need to be in some areas, in my opinion.
Of course, they are the preferred method of travel inside urban areas; the American Public Transportation Association shows this data when they listed in 1999 the top thirty-five largest transit agencies. As seen, they are all major or larger metropolitan areas such as New York, NY, Los Angeles, CA, and Chicago, IL Rural areas need these wonderful services just as often too. People in these settings drive farther to reach their destinations so therefore they drive just as much as in major cities but have more driving time. So therefore air pollution needs to be taken care of everywhere, not just in metropolitan areas. Fifty cents of the gasoline tax dollar increase will go towards making the public transit system more feasible for people. This includes more bus stop locations, more arrival and departure times, more accessible train and airplane facilities, and increased safety precautions. Cheaper fares would also be a good means to increase the use of public transportation.
On my plane trip to the Philippines, I had expected Manila to be a beautiful island with nature trails, tropical flowers, white sand, and palm trees overflowing with coconuts outlining the border of the beaches. I was taken by surprise when I stepped out of the airport to find enormous skyscrapers; cars backed up bumper to bumper for miles in every direction that I turned my head for as far as I could see and a distinguishable stench of unclean air. My skin felt violated just standing there on the edge of the sidewalk. It felt as if my skin was being penetrated by minuscule pollutant dust particles. The city dwellers rushed around with handkerchiefs pressed against their faces to prevent the harmful chemicals from reaching their lungs. The traffic was so awful that if your license plate ended with an odd number you could only drive on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays, and Sundays. If your license plate ended with an even number you could only drive on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. It was mind-boggling. It was like any other large city I had been to, only, more congested and more polluted. Who would’ve thought?
This isn’t a single sad tale about an island out in the Pacific Ocean. The truth is the way the population is growing and places are expanding traffic is also greatly increasing. For example, a recent report from the U.S. Department of Transportation in Hosansky’s article on Traffic Congestion estimated that “in 1994 governments at the federal, state, and local levels spent $124.5 billion on the nation’s transportation system. That figure has certainly risen sharply since 1998 when Congress passed the 6-year $217.9 billion Transportation Equity Act”(par.22). In just four years America has spent $93.4 billion dollars to build and repair roads. Citizens in agreement with constructing more roads do not realize that in five years the new roads will be just as congested and land will be even more scarce for further construction. Another negative aspect of constructing new roads is that, once new roads are built, more shopping centers, surplus housing, food chains, and other sprawling suburbs pop up. These all contribute to more cars, which results in more traffic congestion.
Public transportation is an essential service that must be provided by the government to its citizen. Yet, it still an issue faced by most developing countries all over the world including Malaysia. As it begins to transform itself to become a developed country in 2020, it is crucial to have a comfortable, reliable, and affordable world-class public transportation system to meet the target. According to the Ministry of Transportation (2012), by having an efficient transport network, several main transport issues faced by urban populations such as high traffic congestion during peak periods, cancellations and frequent delays of service, and poor access to public transport services and network can be solved immediately. As part of the government’s commitment to developing a better system for public transportation, Malaysia has invested in many public transportation planning and development programs over the years. For example under the 9th Malaysia Plan (2006-2010), RM 31.8 billion was allocated to improve public transportation performance. (Government of Malaysia, 2006).
An additional RM 35 billion was further allocated under Budget 2009 (2009 – 2014) to enhance the public transportation services in Malaysia, for the allocation of new buses and provision of better infrastructure facilities (Bernama, 2008). However, the utilization rate of public transportation is still poor and the use of private vehicles is continuously rising. This scenario indicates that there are probably several flaws within the previous and current approach (PEMANDU, 2012). Since public transportation is significant to the social and economic life of the citizens, a new plan of massive improvement under the Government Transformation (GTP) Program, the National Key Result Area (NKRA) had been launched in November 2009. There are 6 initiatives under this program and one of them is UPT-NKRA. It stands for NKRA Urban Public Transportation. The objective of UPT-NKRA may differ based on the phase of its implementation. Below are several objectives that need to be achieved in 2010 and 2012.
Improving the public transport modal share from 11% to 15% by the end of 2010 and to 25% by the end of 2012 during the morning peak period of 7am to 9pm in the Klang Valley and will subsequently adopt and apply successful initiatives to Penang and Johor Bahru;
- Improving reliability and journey times;
- Enhancing commuters’ comfort and convenience; and
- Improving accessibility and connectivity so that the percentage of the population living within 400 meters of a public transport route increases from 63% to 80% in 2012.
(Source: Ministry of Transport Malaysia 2012)
In the real world, government policies may not achieve the target and the actual needs. Most of developing countries have contributed so many efforts towards providing better public transportation. However, the implementation always faced with many difficulties. In Pakistan for instance, it was found that factors like the overstated role of the private sector, lack capacity among public transport organizations, negligence in the development of high-capacity public transport, failure to use existing land and integration difficulty had been identified as major problems led to the unsuccessful of their policies (Imran, 2009). The continuous failure to serve the demand of citizens to enjoy better public transportation service is not good for a developed country to be.
In Malaysia, proper planning and significant improvement only had been seen in several main cities such as Kuala Lumpur, Klang Valley and Penang. On the other hand, Kota Kinabalu, the capital city of Sabah that is experiencing rapid population growth and tremendous economic activities still have to depend on bus to bring them into their destinations. This research will try to analyse the impact of public transportation policy on public bus transportation in Kota Kinabalu. Government policy at federal, state and local level will be analysed together with several issue in public transportation. Besides, the feedback of various stakeholders mainly from the government and respective authoritative body, private bus-operators as well as the public users will be taken into account.
Kota Kinabalu and its Public Transportation. Kota Kinabalu is the capital city of Sabah which is populated by people from various ethnics, races and religions. It is located within the rapidly developing West Coast Division. Over the years, this city is experiencing several infrastructure developments. Many shopping complexes and commercial buildings had been erected and these have encouraged more business and trade activities. Kota Kinabalu is considered as an urbanizing city due to its economy and population growth. In 2010, the total estimate number of population in Kota Kinabalu is 452, 058 (Statistics Department, 2011) with average household income RM 2487 per month (Economic Planning Unit, 2011). Apart from becoming a centre for education, business and social activities, Kota Kinabalu also have a number of attractive destinations for the local and international tourists. It was reported that, domestic and foreign visitors entered Sabah through Kota Kinabalu is 100,000 in 2004 and increased to 600, 000 in 2010 (Sabah Tourism Board).
To date, bus (includes express bus, minibuses and vans) still served as the main mode of public transportation to the local residents of Kota Kinabalu. The public bus system is operated by various private companies featured with variable quality. They provide travelling network and service in the urban, sub-urban and intercity areas. The main terminal is located in front of Wawasan Plaza Building where the urban and suburban buses pick and drop their passenger all over again. Another terminal is located in Inanam provides intercity buses service towards long distance travels such as Kudat, Ranau, Sandakan, Tawau, Lahad Datu and Semporna. Taxicabs also still operate in this city but the service focus at the several main areas only such as at the airport, hospitals and terminal bus. Besides, a railway system known as Sabah State Railway also operated in this city. However, the destination coverage is limit to several areas where it connects Kota Kinabalu with Tenom and several other towns in between this railway it provides daily services for commuters, travelers, as well as for cargo transportation.
Players in Public Transportation: Government Entity. A government entity is the important stakeholders in public transportation. Any policy formulated by the government will affect the whole public transportation system in our country. Based on the interpretation provided by the Land Public Transport Act 2010, government entity defined as the federal government, or any state government, state authority or local government; and any ministry, department, office, agency, authority, commission, committee, board, council or other body, corporate or unincorporated, of the Federal Government, or of any State Government or local government, whether established under written law or otherwise. In Malaysia, the federal government is the most responsible party to ensure the better performance of public transportation throughout the country. Only this level of government able has the power to approve and grant funding to any plan and project suggested by the subordinate’s governments.
This is clearly mentioned in the Laws of Malaysia (1997) where the responsibility for financial allocation to regional authorities or local authorities lies with the central government (Vigar et al, 2000). Not only responsible in allocate money to be distributed to the subordinates government but also federal have the power to approve or disapprove any project and program proposed by the lower governments. As transport matters are a federally listed responsibility under the Constitution of Malaysia., the improvement of the public transport system can only be carried out with the central government’s approval since the Transport Ministry holds absolute power over transport planning (Laws of Malaysia, 1997). There are several departments and units under the federal administration works for public transportation namely Land Public Transport Commission, Road Transport Department Commercial Licensing Vehicle Board in Sabah and Sarawak, and many more.
Land Public Transport Commission (LPTC). Land Public Transport Commission is established on 3 June 2010 after the formulation of the Land Public Transport Commission Act 2010 by Parliament in May 2010. This commission gained its full powers under the Land Public Transport Act 2010 and coming into force on 31 January 2011. By the establishment of this commission, the functions of the Commercial Vehicles Licensing Board, the Department of Railways and the tourism vehicles licensing function of the Ministry of Tourism in Peninsular Malaysia have been made inapplicable. However, LPTC only has jurisdiction power over peninsular Malaysia. The commercial Vehicles Licensing Board, the Department of Railways, and the Ministry of Tourism still continue to exercise their respective powers in Sabah and Sarawak. The table is shown below summarizes the power description of LPTC. Powers. Descriptions. Planning. Master plan to ensure comprehensive, integrated and sustainable infrastructure development.
SPAD shall propose policies and plans in relation to or affecting land public transport, and develop strategies in line with the approved policies and plans with a view to achieving a safe, reliable, efficient, responsive, accessible, planned, integrated and sustainable land public transport, while ensuring the provision of affordable services for the carriage of passengers and competitive services for the carriage of goods.(The Land Public Transport Act 2010). Regulatory. Monitoring and regulate the standard of performance of operators through licensing. Regulating all matters pertaining to land vehicles such as train, bus, and taxi services as well as road and rail-based freight transport. Enforcement. Enhanced powers encompassing powers to audit, investigate, suspend/revoke the license, seize vehicles, and penalize operators. Carry out with close cooperation with other enforcement agencies such as the Royal Malaysian Police and the Road Transport Department. Source: Land Public Transportation Commission Official Website, 2012
Road Transport Department. This department is established on 1 April 1946 with the purpose to synchronize all aspects related to transportation all over the states. In line with the establishment of this department, various acts relating to land transportation had been formulated for example Road Traffic Ordinance 1958 and Land Transportation Act 1987. Both aim to uniform and standardize the national transportation law as well as to provide guidelines to the department officers in exercising their duties. This department is under the Land Unit of the Ministry of Transportation in Malaysia. It is responsible to provide counter service for vehicle and driving license as well as to enforce the Land Transportation Act 1987 to ensure well-behaved drivers and safety of the road users.
Commercial Licensing Vehicle Board Sabah (CLVB). Commercial Licensing Vehicle Board in Sabah is established under Commercial Vehicles Licensing Board Act 1987. As stated in the act, the member of the board in Sabah must be appointed by the Minister and shall consist the chairman, a deputy chairman, a representative of the State Ministry charged with the responsibility for transport, a representative of the Road Transport Department, a representative of the Federal Ministry charged with the responsibility for matters relating to the licensing of commercial vehicles and not more than six persons who in the opinion of the Minister have had wide experience or special knowledge in matters relating to transport. CVLB is set up to assist the development of the commercial transport industry by establishing policies to ensure a sufficient and efficient commercial transport service (ww.malaysia.gov.my)
Local Government. The position of local government in Malaysia is stated in Federal Constitution. By virtue of items 4 and 5 of Ninth Schedule of Federal Constitution, local government outside the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya is a subject under the State List. All local authorities outside the Federal Territories will be under the exclusive jurisdiction of States Government. There are 146 local councils in Malaysia made up of city councils, municipal councils, district councils, and special authorities and Kota Kinabalu City Hall is among of them. KKCH is only responsible to provide bus terminals, provide road lighting in their territory
Problem Statement. Since the last three decades, government at the federal and state as well as at the local level had created various policies and plans to improve public transportation especially in urban areas. To date, a significant improvement on public transportation had only been seen in several main cities such as Kuala Lumpur. The difference of this city from the others is that, apart from having a various mode of modern transportation such as Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Monorail System, Kuala Lumpur also has an integrated public bus system namely RapidKL which is characterized with attractive appearance, safety, standardization and reliable schedule of journeys. Kota Kinabalu, one of the developing cities in Malaysia relies predominantly on buses for public transport since the past until the present time and it will likely to continue to be so for years. However, it is still not well-developed and people still perceived it as inadequate, less comfortable, less physically-attractive, non-punctual, and unsafe. The only noticeable change is the introduction of city bus service in 2009 which is still not give big implication to the performance of public bus transportation.
As an effort to make continuous improvement on public transportation, UPT-NKRA is then launched in 2009. After almost 3 years of its implementation, certain cities begin to show improvement in their public transportation services. Based on the GTP Annual Report 2011, 470 RapidKL buses were introduced, which increased the frequency of buses across the Klang Valley. As of 31 December 2011, up to 4.04 million more passengers used the RapidKL bus service in comparison to the preceding year. According to the prime minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak, results of the NKRA of improving urban public transport have been promising as more people are taking the bus as their mode of transport (Bernama, May 18, 2012).
Recently, the coordinator of the working group on public transportation in Malaysia, Mr. A. Sivarajan urged the government to re-evaluate national public transport policy in order to provide a more effective and efficient system to consumers (Bernama, October 25, 2012). According to the working group, several main problems as the concentration of bus service within Kuala Lumpur, the unsafe locations of bus stops, the non-passing of the bus at certain bus stops area, and poor network connectivity had been identified. The above-mentioned scenario convinced the researcher of the need to analyze the government’s public transportation policy. Based on the assumption that the public transportation policy is vague and implicit to the other states and cities, there is a need to critically assess the policy in the context of public bus transportation in Kota Kinabalu. In trying to critically analyze the policy, it is equally important to explore the issues in public transportation and to examine the feedback of the various stakeholders regarding government effort to improve public transportation through its policy implementation.
To analyze the public transportation policy regarding the public busin Kota Kinabalu
To scrutinize the public transportation policy at federal, state and local level
To examine the feedback of main stakeholders regarding government policy and public bus improvement in Kota Kinabalu
To explore the issues associate with public transportation
To recommend solutions for policy improvement purpose
Limitation of Study. The first obstacle that will be confronted by the researcher is limited accessibility to the desired data. Since this research employed a historical method, access to some existed data may not be granted. For example, government documents such as budget and policy plan that is perceived consist of confidential information will not be easily given. Besides, some of the required data may not be available due to poor record systems such as ineffective newspaper cutting service. The absence of these sources creates difficulty in tracing the chronology and meaningful trend of the public transportation policy and progress in Kota Kinabalu. Therefore, in order to get sufficient information, the data findings will not focus on one single area only.
Several places need to be visited and more key actors need to be interviewed. The second obstacle is the availability of the key person (respondent). In qualitative research that used the interview method to collect the data, the difficulty will arise when the respondents cancel the interview appointment due to other commitments. Some of the respondents especially those at the top-level of management usually busy and often going outstations. This situation will possibly cause the problem to collect and analyze the data within the time framework. Therefore, the researcher must always follow up with the respective respondents and plan the interview schedule in an organized manner together with the backup plan.
Significance of Study. The finding of this research is important for future planning purpose. It acts as feedback to the current public transportation policy. The policymakers will be able to decide whether to change or to maintain the status quo of the policy based on the information provided. Besides, it also will contribute to the body knowledge of public transportation literature especially in the context of Sabah. It was found that there were few studies done to analyze the public transportation policy and none of them found to discuss the topic in regards to public bus transportation. Thus, it creates difficulty for the researchers to find convincing and strong statements to support the findings. At the same time, it will serve as a source of reference to future researchers who seek information regarding this topic. The findings also will offer valuable information to public users as they will get cleared pictures and more understanding about the policy progress and how to improve the public bus transportation in Kota Kinabalu.
Definition of Terms and Concepts. Policy. According to Dye (1984), public policy is defined as “whatever government chooses to do or not do”. Dye definition is too broad to be really meaningful but by defining policy in such a way, it is possible to determine the actual or working policy of a government based on what government do or not do (Gunggut, 2006), As for him, it is not enough to look at the written documents such as laws and cabinet decisions but what is actually being done or not being done by the government. In this paper, policy refers to any action and effort the government wants to do and not to do including any program, plan and project that being formulated to serve the public interest.
Policy Analysis. Dye (2000: 4) defined policy analysis as the description and explanation of the causes and consequences of government activities. For him, an analysis of a public policy should be exhibit a primary concern with explanation rather than prescription which is means the policy analyst should attempt to develop or test general propositions about the causes and consequences of public policy and to accumulate reliable search findings of general relevance. Public Transportation. Public transportation is defined as transportation by a conveyance that provides continuing general or special transportation to the public (Tran & Kleiner, 2005). It excludes school buses, charter and sightseeing service and includes various modes such as buses, subways, rail, trolleys, and ferry boats (Ibid).
The following is a proposal to expand public transportation in Milwaukee through transport options such as light rail, commuter rail, and high-speed rail. History. The city of Milwaukee was first incorporated in 1846. In 1860, the first streetcars were introduced on public roads by one of the city’s founders and early mayors, George Walker. These streetcars consisted of horse-drawn rail cars that ran on permanent tracks set at the same level as the street surface. From this came four major operating lines: the Cream City Railroad Company, the Milwaukee City Railroad Company, the Whitefish Bay Railway Company, and the West Side Railway Company. In 1890, all major streetcar operators were consolidated to form the Milwaukee Street Railway Company. After falling into bankruptcy, the company remerged in 1896 as The Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Company. In 1926, the city commissioned a study of Milwaukee area transit.
This study, which concluded in 1928, recommended semi-rapid transit lines, rapid transit lines, streetcars and buses, automobile parking, and truck and rail freight routes. However, by 1960, the public service commission allowed the Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Company (successor to the Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Company) to convert its streetcars and trackless trolleys into bus routes. The Rapid Transit and Speedrail company, which bought the west and southwestern interurban lines, had already gone bankrupt and all transportation provided on previous interurban routes were now provided by the Greyhound Corporation. In 1975, the Milwaukee & Suburban Transport company went bankrupt, and the exclusively driven bus service was acquired by the city of Milwaukee, not Milwaukee county.
In 2011, $810 million dollars in federal funds were turned down for high-speed rail, and a repeal of the Regional Transit Authority Act allowed for Milwaukee and its peers to establish joint control for future transit efforts. Today, the Milwaukee County Transit System (MCTS) operates 415 buses on 59 unique routes and transports 150,000 people per weekday. Almost half of the system’s riders are people aged 18-44. 42% percent use the system for commuting to work or job searching, 11% for shopping, 12% to attend school, 15% for medical appointments, and 6% for various other reasons. A new city-owned streetcar opened in 2018, operating along a 2.1-mile route from the intermodal station to Burns Commons park. Buses and streetcars aren’t enough to fill our transportation needs, which is what this proposal is here to talk about. This proposal calls for the establishment of:
- A starter light rail line from downtown Milwaukee to the Milwaukee County Zoo
- Expansion of the current Amtrak Hiawatha Service from Chicago to Milwaukee into a high-speed rail service from Chicago – Milwaukee – Madison
- A commuter rail line from Milwaukee to Racine and Kenosha
- A Milwaukee County commuter rail system
The commuter rail line from Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha would utilize existing train depots from the former CN&W North Line such as the Milwaukee intermodal station, Cudahy depot, South Milwaukee passenger station, Racine Depot, and Kenosha Station. New stations would be constructed on the Southside of Milwaukee, Oak Creek, Caledonia, and Somers. The service would not operate on tracks owned by the state, but rather tracks owned by Union Pacific and Canadian Pacific Railway lines. 14-weekday trains would operate in each direction at top speeds of 59 mph with an average speed of 38 mph. Trains would make connections with local transit systems such as MCTS, Belle Urban System, and Kenosha Area Transit, with special dedicated service to the airport from Cudahy/St. Francis, and the Downtown Business District from the intermodal station. Trains would also be scheduled to meet Metra trains at either Kenosha or Waukegan, with 6-minute timed transfers to trains. The average travel time between Kenosha and Milwaukee is expected to be 53 minutes.
- Faster travel time
- Higher reliability
- Reduced air pollution and energy consumption
- 900,000 jobs accessible within one mile of train stations
- Comfort and Convenience
- Economic growth
- $207.5 million for capital costs
- $10.35 million in operating costs
- 15-17% farebox recovery
For the Milwaukee county commuter rail system, two existing stations will be used, the Milwaukee Intermodal Station and Milwaukee Mitchell Airport station, while the others will be all new. These new stations include North Avenue, Century City Miller Coors, Miller Park, Valley, Lakefront, Bayview, Oklahoma, H20, We Energies, Wauwatosa, Regional Medical, Elm Grove, Brookfield, West Allis, State Fair, New Berlin, Waukesha, Zoo, Mayfair, and North Tosa for a grand total of 23 stations. This commuter rail service would use 55 miles of existing trains and 7,000 units of multi-family residential and other real estate such as retail and offices. Benefits: Unfortunately, there is no data researched on this as this specific proposal is a few months old, dating back to December of 2018, so I do not wish to assume benefits that this proposal may bring.
On the other side of things, the only con so far of this proposal is its price tag at $1.4 billion. With the expansion of the Amtrak Hiawatha Service to Madison and conversion to high-speed rail, People will be able to travel from Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago, at faster times than driving and flying. The extension of the service will serve for future plans of extending the route all the way to Minneapolis/St. Paul. This service will also provide passenger connections between Milwaukee airport, Chicago, and long-distance train service. All current stops will be kept with new stations in Madison, Brookfield, Oconomowoc, and Watertown. Current speeds of 79mph will be kept on the current Hiawatha Service route, while speeds of 110mph will be reached on the Milwaukee – Madison corridor.
- Reliable, efficient, frequent, and cost-effective rail service
- Unaffected by traffic congestion and weather
- Improves regional mobility
- Enhances intermobility
- Promotes economic development and livable communities
My purpose of this project is to advocate for public transportation and the expansion and creation of modes of transit such as light rail, high-speed rail, and commuter rail. I want my specific audience to get that public transit is worth it and that the benefits of such transit outweigh the cost of it. I will know when I’m “done” with this project when I feel like I have successfully advocated for the expansion of public transportation in Milwaukee. I am building ethos for this project by using sources with various studies and credibility, such as the encyclopedia of Milwaukee.
Now let me tell you. There certainly are annoying people on the public busses. People who sit next to you on an empty bus, people who talk loudly on their phones, and people who try to talk to you when you are clearly not in the mood are three examples of this. I beg I demand, I implore you to join me in agreeing that these people are what ruins public transport for us people. My first qualm with people on buses is those who sit next to you when the rest of the bus is empty. Studies have shown that 80% of people agree that this is unnecessary, annoying, and just downright uncomfortable. Don’t you agree that this type of behavior is truly irritating? Imagine this: you are on your way home from a hard day at school. Or on the way to a friend after a stressful day at home. You manage to grasp the luxury of an empty bus. You realize that you’d have a number of stops on the way there so you begin to nod off. All of a sudden you hear the “Is this seat taken?” and of course because we are very polite we’d say no and shift to the side, pressed right up against the window.
Now you’d have to suffer the rest of your journey in uncomfortable silence while trying to make yourself not touch them and thus moving closer and closer to the wall of the bus, which no-one knows how many germs exist on. When your stop would come, you would have to be the one who apologizes when it’s your time to awkwardly shuffle past them. Now, tell me does this sound like your ideal journey? My second problem is with people who decide it is ok to have very loud conversations on the bus. Since when was it socially acceptable to loudly rant to your friend in some foreign language on a bus full of people? However worse is when it’s actually in English. Then we become the impolite ones. When you can’t help but listen to a conversation you don’t even care about. When I can’t hear the other side of the conversation my brain is always listening and trying to fill in the blanks. These people can’t bear to whisper or heaven forbid them holding their thoughts until they’re off the bus?
Finally what irritates me most are people who try to have long, pointless conversations with us after a long day. This is sometimes the only time away from school or work and family where we have time to do what we want without having to deal with anyone else. We are not rude. We just need space and quiet. When I am quite clearly listening to music, and my body language definitely says, « Leave me alone, why do they keep talking to me? ». Trying with small talk is fine; I understand that, but to constantly push conversation? That’s rude. Now, I don’t believe I’m an unreasonable person, and I have nothing against your average commuter, but these people are what ruin your journey that could otherwise be a pleasant experience.
Traffic congestion in many cities around the world is severe. One possible solution to this problem is to impose heavy taxes on car drivers and use this money to make public transport better. This essay will discuss the benefits and drawbacks of such a measure. One of the first benefits of such a measure is that the heavy taxes would discourage car owners from using their cars because it would become very expensive to drive. This would mean that they would begin to make use of public transport instead, thus reducing traffic problems and pollution as well. Another benefit would be that much more use would be made of public transport if it was improved. It is often the case that public transport in cities is very poor. For example, we often see old buses and trains that people would rather not use. High taxes would generate enough money to make the necessary changes.
Nevertheless, there are drawbacks to such a solution. First and foremost, this would be a heavy burden on the car drivers. At present, taxes are already high for a lot of people, and so further taxes would only mean less money at the end of the month for most people who may have no choice but to drive every day. In addition, this type of tax would likely be set at a fixed amount. This would mean that it would hit those with less money harder, whilst the rich could likely afford it. It is therefore not a fair tax. To conclude, this solution is worth considering to improve the current situation, but there are advantages and disadvantages of introducing such a policy. In modern life, we have to face many problems one of which is traffic congestion becoming more serious day after day. It is said that the high volume of vehicles, the inadequate infrastructure, and the irrational distribution of the development are the main reasons for increasing traffic jams.
The major cause leading to traffic congestion is the high number of vehicles which was caused by the population and the development of the economy. To solve this problem, the government should encourage people to use public transport or vehicles of small size such as bicycles or make tax on private vehicles. Particularly, in some Asia countries such as Viet Nam, the local authorities passed laws restricting the number of vehicles for each family. The methods mentioned above are indeed effective in fact. That the inadequate infrastructure cannot handle the issue of traffic is also a crucial reason. The public transport such as bus, subway or train is not available, and its quality is very bad, especially in the developing countries. Besides, the highway and road network is incapable of meeting the requirement of an increasing number of the vehicle.
Coping with these difficulties, the government should make an investment in the traffic facilities, namely, the public transport need improving to become more modern and convenient. In addition, it is useful to build overpasses and more lanes in the streets. Apparently, the irrational distribution and the lack of conscience make the traffic worse and worse. The head offices, universities, or hospitals often located in the center of the city attracting a heavy flow of people in rush hour. To handle this situation, the government should allocate suitably, for instance, some university or office will be moved to the outskirt of the city. It is necessary to encourage people to obey the traffic rules which will make greatly change the problem of traffic. Finally, it’s high time we were aware of the disadvantages as well as the solutions to the traffic congestion. With a great effort from each individualist and government, our society will be definitely cleaner and well organized.
The transportation industry is diverse in all aspect of transportation, depending upon which mode of transportations mode of regulations that will affect the success of a company. The United States transportation regulations’ main focus is to protect the public, safety, and impact modes of transportation that will improve or affect the environment (Coyle, Novak, Gibson, & Bardi, 2011). Transportation plays an important role in the economic infrastructure of the United States, thus having all Government agencies invested in the stability and economic growth of the transportation industry. Motor carriers are considered to be one of the most dependable modes of transportation throughout the United States.
The logistical manager is responsible for developing and planning a strategically base plan to compete in the growing economic markets. Depending on whether or not the managers have the resources, capital and the ability to outsource information depicts what type of adverse decision the manager has to take. The motor industry has grown since the increase in product demand. Transportation cost includes the choice of carrier, operating cost, travel time, safety as well as labor cost. (Hazen & Lynch, 2008). Reliability and dependability are two key concepts that determine the success of a company along with the delivery of the product. The logistical manager’s responsibility is to develop a blueprint of operational preparedness and function that will help customers and reduce.
Traveling by public transport is now very helpful and interesting. It is not only for the benefits of individuals but also for the benefits of the whole society. Traveling by public transport is very useful in saving money. You do not need to spend much money on purchasing your cars while transport charges are rather cheap. With the money you can do much more things interesting, for example buying new clothes, buying more books or helping orphan children or contributing to protecting our environment or investing in your own business. In addition, traveling by public transport also has its own interests. Imagine that you are on a bus, take a seat and start to relax by reading the newspaper or sleeping a little bit. It is much more convenient than concentrating your mind on the road to avoid accidents.
You might argue that the car can take you everywhere in the countries and public transport is not as convenient. But it was long ago. Now, it is much easier for you to travel by public transport, especially by train. Most importantly, traveling by public transport can help reduce environmental pollution. Our environment is deteriorating with every passing day But nowadays, you are breathing in the air that full of dust and carbon dioxide and many exotic chemicals that can suffocate our life. According to statistics many people now are suffering the diseases related to the respiration system. The situation is more and more dangerous now when much more people in developing countries are using cheap motorbikes which can exhaust out many exotic chemicals.
It is time you using public transport to reduce air pollution. Imagine how much you can do by using public transport. Instead of using a car, you can get on a public bus. And if twenty people get on the bus we can reduce the smoke from twenty cars. Though the bus also can exhaust smoke the smoke exhausted by one bus is much less than that of the twenty cars. Moreover, this also prevents traffic jam because the room a bus take is much less than twenty cars .we will not wait for more than one hour in line to get to the office in the environment full of dust and smoke. In the case of underground buses, using public transport is very helpful in dealing with traffic jams. That is terrible in an industrial society when time is very precious.
Public transport is an important and necessary aspect of modern-day society. It can be defined as transport that is available to the public, that charge set fares, and runs along set routes. For example, buses, trains, light rail, ferries and so on. It is essential to be successful when planning and developing a public transport system as this can have an abundance of advantages when completed correctly, such as environmental and financial sustainability, increased tourism revenue for all involved, increased housing value, opportunities for physical activity, and holistic heightened quality of life. If managed poorly this can have a detrimental effect on the region, such as lower housing values, environmental effects, increased crime rates, and anti-social behavior. A quality public transport system is indispensable in any advanced society and those who are lacking will be at a severe disadvantage.
Sustainability has been identified as a key concern for public transport planning. The goal is to create a public transport system that meets public environmental, social, and economic needs. The environmental impacts of public transport on the world have been widely acknowledged in recent years. Due to the transport sector almost solely relying on fossil fuels, nearly a quarter of all Greenhouse Gases were contributed to transport in 2007 around Europe. The quality and effectiveness of transportation systems must be increased due to the demand of the public meanwhile decreasing the environmental pollution. Deviating preferred methods of transport to the public system can help mitigate social and environmental problems. (Susniene 2012)
The infrastructure of transportation plays a vital role in sustaining the economy. The growth of tourism in the United States has urged the government to commit to developing a high-speed, national rail system. It is argued that a rapid rail system would alleviate accessibility restrictions and improve tourism around the country. American citizens were also positive about the idea as this new rail system would ease traffic congestion and also minimizing fuel consumption and parking problems. For tourists, a high-speed rail system can help intertwine its various tourism products and services. However major attractions and destinations may lose significant amounts of income due to the accessibility of alternative opportunities. For a project like this to be successful and profitable, tourism providers must work towards a long term goal for sustainable advantage throughout the region. (Becker & George 2011)
Increasing the financial sustainability of public transport will allow funds to be spent more efficiently, such as advocating for the effectiveness of the transport system rather than using private cars, which produces increased amounts of fossil fuels. In Germany, the share of operating expenses which were covered by paying customers raised from 59% in 1991 to 77% in 2007. In order to achieve financial sustainability, the public transport system must be planned extensively (Buehler & Pucher 2011). However, many other professionals argue that long term planning does not produce increased financial sustainability. It is contended that day-to-day planning lowers and neglects long-term environmental goals, taking a more focused approach to economic sustainability (Hrelja 2011).
The use of public transport not only reduces greenhouse gas emissions but also promotes physical activity to the individuals that partake. Studies show that 29% of people that walk to and from public transport reach the recommended daily amount of physical activity. It is argued that limiting the convenience of parking, and manipulating costs such as car travel and petrol among other things, will deter people from using personal car travel and increase the likelihood of using public transport, resulting in an increase in physical activity. Furthermore, it is conveyed that individuals do not in fact desire minimal commuting time and further studies reveal that half of the employees covet a travel time of 20 minutes or more, while only 3% wish for less than 2 minutes of commuting time. Workers expressed that they enjoyed being able to complete their daily exercise while traveling rather than allocating alternative times throughout the day. The opportunity for physical activity in the use of public transport has an array of health benefits to society. (Merom et al. 2008)
Research has revealed that users of private vehicles have shown willingness to switch to the use of public transport if this mode of transport shows improved quality and efficiency. Furthermore, it is also known that users of the car have underestimated the quality of their experience when using public transport and are positively surprised by their predisposed improbable satisfaction. It is suggested that this is the reason why neglecters of the public transport system are doing so as their expectations of the standard are set too low. This is due to the majority of the public having little experience and knowledge when it comes to using public transport. That is why it is important to advocate and advertise the necessity of using public transport in order to achieve environmental and economic sustainability. (Pedersen et al. 2011)
Successful implementation of public transport can have major impacts on tourism, which will consequently significantly affect the economy. The largest cities around the world with the greatest levels of tourism have government bodies that actively promote public transport. Bus, metro, and train systems are essential services for tourists arriving at large cities as private transport is deemed too expensive or scarce. Tourism clearly increases the demand for public transport and because of the extensive pressure, public transport systems need to be adaptable making it an essential element for city planners (Albalate & Bel 2010). Although this is controversial as some experts believe that is it difficult to assess the impact of tourism as transport corporations cannot distinguish commuters from tourists (Becker & George 2011).
Des Rosiers et al. (2010) conducted a study between 1993 and 1997, attempting to determine whether the quality of bus service in an urban area would translate into high house values. Regular routes, Metro bus, and express routes were individually considered when establishing the effect on house prices. Findings suggest that increasing the frequency of regular bus routes adversely affected house values. In contrast, increasing the frequency of express routes has positive influences on the values of housing as it proved to be a convenient substitute for the private car. This resolves that having a quality and successful bus service in an urban area will increase the value of housing. Although if the service is conceived poorly, this will have an opposite effect, making the houses of lesser value (Rosiers et al. 2010)
It can be difficult to assess the quality of a service as it is influenced by the perceptions of the public which takes into account the customer’s preferences and behaviors. Analyzing and assessing the quality of service allows it to be improved and therefore increase the attractiveness to society. Customers continue to require higher standards of service which results in higher expectations for quality. The assessment of the quality of public transport is completed using a set of criteria determined by the views of the passengers. Eight pieces of criteria form an assessment outlining the desired and required performance from the customers. Quality comes at a cost, so operators must strike a balance between the quality of service and the possibility of providing it. Quality urban public transport will lead to reducing traffic congestion and improving the quality of life for many cities around the world (Dragu et al. 2013).
Anti-social behavior is ever-present within the public transport system and it is a complex and challenging issue. This is because it cannot be tamed using a single government policy but, many preventative policies must be put in place to enable change. Public transport is a medium in which an abundance of social groups meets, resulting in the potential for dispute. There is evidence that eradicating anti-social behavior on public transport would culminate in a rise of paying passengers. Studies completed in the United Kingdom showed that 32 percent of survey respondents were concerned with anti-social behavior on public transport, with up to 76 percent claiming to have witnessed this. Reducing anti-social behavior on public transport is fundamental in order to increase the overall presence of passengers making use of the service (Moore 2010).
There are many key elements that forge the public transport system and if it is to be carried out successfully each of these components must interact. The crucial aims are long-term environmental, social, and economic sustainability. For this to happen, customers within society must be attracted to oversee their personal vehicles in favor of public transport. The reduced cars on the roads will therefore decrease greenhouse gas emissions enhancing environmental sustainability. Furthermore, a greater number of paying customers will commit a rise to economic sustainability as seen in Germany. The public transport system will be assessed in and around Sydney in Assessment 3. The quality and allure of public transport is the most important aspect to achieving long term sustainability both environmentally and economically.
Example #11 – interesting ideas
What are the Cons of Free Public Transportation? I`m writing a persuasive essay on free public transportation and I can’t find anything wrong with it except higher taxes, do you have any ideas about why free public transportation is bad???
Anwer. The problem is motivation. The people running public transportation will have no reason to do a good job as they’ll get paid anyways. With a fare system, they’re motivated to generate more revenue so they can get raises. Make them public servants and they’ll work like public servants.
What is a counter-argument if im for free public transportation? I`m writing a persuasive essay about free public transportation for everybody. What is a counter-argument I can make?
Answer. I am against free public transportation because “free” means paid for by taxpayers, and I am a taxpayer. I want my taxes to be used for more worthy purposes such as national defense. Giving everyone free public transportation will cost me more money on my taxes because they will need to raise taxes to pay for that.
As a believer in the capitalist system, I believe also that prices are necessary to manage a balance between supply and demand. With a limited number of seats and operating schedule, the availability of transit is limited. But if it is free, demand is potentially unlimited. This could produce unsafe unhospitable conditions such as long lines or people trampling each other to get their “free ride” in the same way that they might trample and kill people to get a cheap TV at Walmart. To maintain a safe environment, prices for travel should be set that control the demand for travel to more closely match the available supply.
Public transportation? Why is public transportation not accessible on weekends. I live less than 10 miles from downtown Minneapolis I have notices taking a Bus on weekends is a joke on Sat. It’s very limited Sun. no service I myself don’t take the bus but feel sorry for people that do.. I notice in other parts of Metro they seem to run more buses why don’t they run the same all over metro.
Answer. In the USA public transportation is focused on commuters going back and forth to work at the “normal” times, and in some cases on the people traveling to special events (such as sporting events). Because of the cost, the schedules are severely restricted on evenings and weekends. Most public transportation is subsidized by taxpayers. Seeing as there is not a great demand for evening and weekend service, the government is not willing to spend the money to run almost empty buses up and down the road.
In the USA there is a culture of personal automobile ownership and use. Other than in New York City, and some college towns, most people use automobiles for their transportation needs. Most of the people riding public transportation other than commuting to work are people who can not afford a vehicle. The average taxpayer is not concerned about weekend and evening service and does not see a reason to pay higher taxes to provide it.
Why private cars are better than public transportation .? Tell me some disadvantages of public transportation and the advantage of private cars.
Answer. Private transportation: You can go where you want when you want. Public transportation: You are stuck with routes and times.
Private transportation: Faster because you only stop when you want. Public: Slower because they have preset and requested stops.
Private trans: Holidays and weekends mean nothing if you don’t want them to. Public trans: Different, and often more restrictive, schedules on holidays and weekends.
Private trans: It’s private. Turn up the radio, pick your nose, whatever. Public trans: Listen to the baby next you cry all day, watch someone pick their nose, get to talk to the mentally unstable, etc… That’s some. But, I would be remiss in not pointing out the pluses of public transportation. Public transportation uses less fuel. Fewer vehicles mean less pollution. Fewer vehicles mean less traffic. You can let someone else worry about the driving, maintenance, and fueling of the vehicle. Not having a car is cheaper.
Cite this page
This content was submitted by our community members and reviewed by Essayscollector Team. All content on this page is verified and owned by Essayscollector Team. All comments and user reviews are moderated by Essayscollector Team. In the case of any content-related problem, you can reach us through the report button.