some people believe that the best way to deal with heavy traffic in city centres is for privately owned vehicles to be banned, others however think this is not a realistic solution.

In the competitive world, traffic has become a major issue in urban areas. Few individuals opine that government should be allowed merely public

and imposed restrictions on the private mode of

while others opposed

statement.

essay will articulate both views of

argument in the following paragraphs.

On the one hand, there are numerous reasons why a majority of multitudes are not supporting private motor

. The most predominant is the time consuming which is experienced on the roads owing to the significant proportion of owned

on the highways. To explain, the young generation preferred their own

mode

of the public in the metropolitan cities, especially in the peak hours which is the main cause of an astronomical amount of traffic.

, a headline of the famous channel BBC ( BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION) revealed that 59% of the casualties are escalated because private

is used in suburban areas.

, people are not in favour due to the detrimental consequences.

, on the other side, youngers argued that it is not a productive approach to tackle

issue. The most prominent is the loss chunk amount of money which is squandered for the private

industry. To explicate it, the masses would be unsatisfied with the implementation of

law and a terrible impact on the convenience and efficiency that can get with their own

. To cite an example, a survey was conducted by the World Health Organisation found that 30% of the masses are suffered from depression in 2011 because Indian legal authorities implemented laws limiting the percentage of private

in the inner-city. So,

is not an effective method for alleviating the traffic issue.

In conclusion,

there may be some benefits to prohibiting the movement owned

in the centre of the city but advantages of private

cannot be underestimated because of time-saving and flexibility.