Restoration of old buildings in main cities involves enormous government expenditure. It would be more beneficial to spend this money to build new houses and roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

One of the main controversial topics in today’s world is related to the refurbishment and reconditioning of old buildings in major urban areas. Some people argue that the

money

should be used for different purposes

such

as building new houses and roads. I partially agree with

this

opinion and will sustain my view with examples.

Firstly

, numerous large cities are confronted with a major housing problem because of increasing population density and lack of residential land. Because of that, it would be irrational to spend public

money

on restoring old buildings, when numerous young people are in desperate need of buying a property.

For example

, if an old building in a certain

city

is deemed unfit for purpose,

then

it should be demolished and replaced with a high rise building that could accommodate hundreds of people. In

this

way, the government will ensure that taxpayer’s

money

is used in the right direction,

instead

of wasting it on ancient buildings.

Secondly

, old buildings are usually huge and have an exorbitant maintenance cost that involves electricity, heating, redecoration and staff’s salaries.

Moreover

, most of the time, they will bring no revenue,

thus

making them too expensive to restore and keep them in the cities.

Furthermore

, the general architecture of cities has changed throughout the years and the old buildings prevent

city

planners from developing the

city

even

further

.

Consequently

,

this

makes it clear that the governments should use the budget for building new housing and road infrastructure,

instead

of pouring

money

into a bottomless pit.

Nevertheless

, old buildings with substantial historic or architectural value can be a source of revenue rather than a great expense.

Moreover

, these structures can give a

city

character and tell the story of a

city

’s history and how it has changed over time. Cities, like Paris,

for instance

, are massively popular tourist destinations only because people can admire magnificent buildings from centuries ago.

Therefore

, perhaps only

such

buildings should be preserved and generally speaking not all buildings that were built in the past are equally important. In conclusion, there are some interesting buildings that are worth being preserved for the reasons mentioned above.

However

, in my opinion, many old buildings are not fit for purpose anymore and are a substantial drain on public funds, which could be used for better purposes

such

as building housing and roads.