It is too expensive to look after and repair old buildings. This money should be spent on modern buildings instead. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

The idea that, whether ancient buildings or contemporary buildings are more beneficial, remains of debate. Some people believe governments should spend money for modern constructions rather than the historic ones.

However

, I have to disagree with

this

argument. On the one hand, there are several reasons can be cited why should governments protect ancient buildings.

To begin

with, historic buildings are part of a country’s heritage,

as a result

, they show us how people lived in the past,

for example

palaces in Persia tells us about monarch lifestyle.

Moreover

, old constructions give character to countries, in that they are architectural symbols of a country like the pyramids in Egypt or Taj Mahal of India.

Furthermore

, promoting tourism aid the economic growth which can be replaced in turns of the amount which has been spent for preservation.

On the other hand

, some expenditure should be allocated for modern constructions.

First

of all, contemporary buildings can be designed to be environmentally friendly.

For instance

, modern insulation

such

as water, sound and

heat covering

Accept comma addition

heat, covering

can make houses more energy-efficient.

In addition

, there can be modern glass buildings take advantages of natural light

instead

of wasting electricity which can cost a fortune.

Last

but not least, new buildings can

also

be designed to complement the old ones, the reason behind is that it can show the country’s architectural development. The reason cited above have justified spending money on preserving ancient constructions is not a waste, while it can

also

expend some of the budget on designing efficient modern buildings as well.