In the lecture, the lecturer strongly argues
that congestion pricing has not any advantages. This
totally contradicts the reading passage’s claim that
this system has several benefits. In fact, the reading is
somewhat wrong, less convincing, and even excessively exaggerated.
First, the speaker maintains that it is not makes the roads safer for drivers because high speeds make serious accident. In other
words, a 30% increase in speed make serious injury or death. This casts
doubt on the reading passage’s argument that congestion
pricing makes driving much safer.
Second, the professor insists on the
fact that the system makes public transportation less
convenient since the capacity of this will exceed. In fact, people
also cannot easily catch a transportation. It’ll be loads to
overcrowded conditions. This rebuts the reading passage’s insistence that it results in a city’s public transportation
becoming more convenient.
The last, the lecturer believes that congestion pricing doesn’t match with financial
benefits in that the fees deter suburban shoppers. What he emphasizes
is that retailers blame the congestion charges for
lagging sales. This refutes the reading passage’s assertion that congestion charging has a good for business.
첫댓글 수고했다,,,홧팅,,,