Task 2: Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree?

Opinions are divided as to whether the public

libraries

might be a waste of money after the advent of the same functions of computers. I completely disagree that these public places would be unworthy to be subsidized. There are several reasons why I would argue that computer technology can replace public

libraries

entirely.

Firstly

, the main duty of public

libraries

in communities is that

this

is a great place that provides safe, accessible, and free access to educational resource centres for every member throughout national countries, no matter their socioeconomic status. They can count on their

libraries

to provide them with the resources they need to succeed. Another reason is that public

libraries

can be the essential community hubs that serve as centres and free spaces for individuals

spending

Change the verb form

to spend

show examples

time together or having meetings.

On the other hand

,

although

the computer technologies have comparable functions, it might have a negative effect on underserved people who want to approach these facilities but they do not have technological appliances. I believe that public

libraries

have provided a crucial service for poor and homeless people across the countries.

For example

, if the governments stopped investing and supporting

this

place, those who are impoverished might not be able to seek employment opportunities from internet access there. By doing

this

, everyone in wide societies will be easily accessible and convenient equally and

also

strengthen the communities. In conclusion, I would argue that sustainable public

libraries

have much more benefits than computers. They not only totally supply the needs of every member using free resources, but

also

give beneficial services for those who are disadvantaged people to access technologies.