In some cities, governments have tried to reduce traffic congestion. For instance, they have imposed a congestion tax during rush hour. Do you think this development is positive or negative?
题目大意
在一些城市，政府已经尝试去减少交通拥堵。比如，他们已经在高峰期设置了拥堵税。你认为这种发展是积极的还是消极的？
写作思路解析
➡️Positive or negative 积极还是消极, 且题目中并没有A和B比较的内容，判定为单观点议论文，建议采用倾向型站一方强调积极或消极。
➡️关键词：主体对象-Government政府，政府作为主体一般要从社会层面出发进行思考，综合考虑其政策；政府的目的为reduce traffic congestion 减少交通拥堵；具体措施为impose a congestion tax引入拥堵税，设置时间为rush hour高峰时期。考虑到tax是一种很好的调控手段，且可以增加财政收入。且如果拥堵问题能够得到解决的话对于汽车尾气造成的环境污染也有很好的缓解作用，本作者尝试了烤鸭们不喜欢的选择的角度进行分析。设定立场为积极。
➡️1）确实能够缓解交通拥堵，当设置拥堵税，人们会倾向于选择公共交通。
➡️2）同时可以缓解环境污染。
➡️让步：增加人们的财政负担。特别是出租车司机。
提纲梳理见下
写作示范
Currently，a growing number of people have migrated to the cities especially metropolitan ones, and almost every family tend to purchase their own private cars. However, this tendency gives rise to the phenomenon of traffic congestion in cities and some governments have enacted the congestion tax to alleviate the situation. From my perspective, it is a feasible method to avoid traffic bottlenecks.
First of all, imposing such tax would make people alter their choice to travel. As the traffic modes of residents turn to diversify，along with public transportation systems becoming perfect, a considerable number of people, such as commuters who have reliance on traffic transport, would be unwilling to pay the congestion fees, so they will tend to travel by public transport in order to save money. As a result, the traffic density during rush hours can be alleviated to a great extent. In addition,by utilizing the congestion tax, governments also can invest more funds to improve the public transport infrastructure by the revenue , which can provide better service and then attract more people to choose public transport.
Another merits is that by introducing congestion tax to control traffic, environment protection could benefit from it as well. To be more specific, vast quantities of car exhaust generated by cars is one of the main culprits of global warming, which can cause serious air pollution in cities and lead to several kinds of diseases，such as bronchitis and asthma. Theoretically，imposing congestion tax may lead some citizens to diversify their commuting methods during the rush hours， by which I mean private vehicles may not be their priority choices but undergrounds，buses or shared bikes which release much less carbon emissions into the atmosphere. This eventually protects the general public’s health and well-being.
Admittedly, imposing congestion tax could have an adverse impact on citizens. For example, taxi drivers, who have to drive cars every day to make a living,would suffer from increasing financial burden which they would not have to undertake before. Hence paying extra tax may increase the burden on them economically and reduce their amount of income. However, if the traffic congestion cannot be eased, the cost of fuel consumption might be even more expensive than the congestion tax.
In conclusion, it seems to me that imposing the congestion tax is a reasonable approach to relieve the current dilemma mainly because of the alleviation of jam and the enhancement of the environment.
