some people believe that construction of new public buildings such as museums, town halls and sporting facilities is more important than renovation of the existing ones, while others disagree. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Whether the government should restore old buildings or not has always sparked a heated debate. Some people argue that

instead

of restoring old buildings, the government should build new roads and other structures. While I admit that restoration of ancient buildings involves a huge amount of funds, spending on them is as important as building new roads and structures. There are numerous reasons to support

this

viewpoint.

First

of all, the old buildings depict our history and culture of people of ancient times.

For example

, the architecture and artistic work of old buildings are rare to find nowadays.

Hence

, they must be conserved.

Moreover

, we must preserve historical constructions for our future generations and understand that even if one piece is destroyed, it is destroyed forever. These buildings have their own character which we can’t replicate in modern architecture. Another benefit of preserving these heritage buildings is that they can be converted into tourist attractions.

However

, in spite of these benefits, there are some analysts who argue that it is more important to spend money on constructing new infrastructure rather than renovate old buildings. According to them, the hard earned

moenythey

of or occurring or payable every month

monthly

give to the government in the form of taxes must be spent on something

that is

beneficial to them like new roads or flyovers. Since renovations involve financial resource they feel new buildings should be constructed as per the modern architecture and

needs

Suggestion

the needs

of the society. In conclusion,

although

preserving ancient buildings involves a substantial amount of money, I insist that they must be preserved because they are reminders of our culture and heritage.