I thought I would make use of a couple of essays I had written some time ago, on the topic of transport. The structure is relatively straightforward, just “What are the advantages and disadvantages”, nothing more. I made a tutorial about the three different types of advs and disadvs essays some weeks ago, so this is just a reminder of the basic structure for that.
I will repeat the structure and post the two essays below. Any questions, write to me anytime at email@example.com
Sentence 1- Paraphrase question
Sentence 2- Outline sentence
Paragraph 2: advantages
Sentence 3- Topic sentence (Advantage 1)
Sentence 4- Explain/expand on how this is an advantage
Sentence 5- Example
Paragraph 3: disadvantages
Sentence 6- Topic sentence (Disadvantage 1)
Sentence 7- Explain/expand on how this is a disadvantage
Sentence 8- Example
Sentence 9- restatement of main points
Public transport should be made free of charge.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of such a move?
Some people believe that all transportation used by the general public should be without charge. It can be argued that the advantage to this move would be congestion free city centres, while the disadvantage might be an increase in general taxation to pay for it.
Firstly, the main benefit to such a policy would be car free streets. That is to say, if people could get around their city for free, then they might well use the bus, metro, etc, instead of going by private car. For example, a survey of commuters in 2015 conducted by the UK Dept of Transport said that if all public means of transportation were free to use, 90% would be tempted to leave their cars at home. If this policy were to be implemented then city centres might be car and congestion free.
Secondly, although this policy would undoubtedly be of benefit to citizens, a major drawback would be the increase in personal taxation required to pay for this scheme. That is to say, local government needs money to pay drivers of the bus, tram, metro, etc, and the vehicles themselves need to be bought and maintained, which is not cheap. Research carried out by the University of York suggests that local taxes in the UK would have to go up by 25% in order to pay for this scheme to be put into practice. It can well be argued that local tax payers would not be particularly happy to fund such a policy, beneficial though it may be.
In conclusion, despite the fact that free public transport would be a significant improvement to many towns and city centres, the cost of implementation may be too prohibitive for this to become reality.
Some people believe that drivers should be forced to retake their test every five years.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this measure?
It has been argued that car drivers should be compelled to take their driving test regularly every five years. I believe the main advantage of this would be to increase public safety, while the disadvantage would be the cost of retraining and retaking the exam.
Firstly, it can be said that many accidents on the road are preventable, and are often due to poor driving skills as many people pass the basic driving test and have no further training after this, which can lead to carelessness and the forming of bad driving habits. In this case, the main advantage of retraining and retaking the test might go some way to making drivers take more care upon the roads. For example, a survey of car drivers in 2015 by the UK Dept of Transport said that 70% of drivers admitted to coming close to an accident in the past year, mainly due to speeding or inattention. If this research gives a true picture then compulsory retaking of the test could be a major factor in reducing accidents and fatalities upon the roads.
Secondly, although this measure may have many benefits, the main disadvantage to this measure could be the considerable expense of training and the test fee, which many drivers would be resentful of paying. That is to say, if drivers are forced to retake the exam, they may try to cheat or to get around the requirements in some way to avoid paying the fees. For example, some drivers may feel they are being unfairly treated owing to the bad driving of others, so they may bribe the examiner or buy a false licence certificate which would undermine the whole point of the scheme which is to improve road safety standards. In which case, the whole project would be pointless and no reduction in accidents would occur.
In conclusion then, although public safety would surely be the winner if drivers were retested, the drawback to this scheme would be that many people might not take it seriously and would cheat or bribe their way to a test certificate. In which event it would be doomed to failure.