Too much money is spent in maintaining and repairing old buildings, some people think they should be knocked down and give way to modern building. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Controversial opinions have formed regarding repairments of

buildings

. People in favour of it often state the value of preservation of cultural appearance whereas others point to the costs of

such

actions. In my opinion,

although

saving a traditional face of cities could be beneficial, it is not necessary in many cases. To commence with, it is rather intuitive the more tourists visit a city, the more they would spend their money there.

As a result

, many governments rely on tourism for the purpose of riching their treasuries. Since cultural appearance is one of the attractions for them, activists argue that maintaining not only the historical sites but

also

the residential

buildings

are necessary. Most European small cities and villages are great exemplars where the taxation for reconstruction is extremely high.

For instance

, in Lucerne in Switzerland, even though the downtown contains many skyscrapers, the houses in other parts of it are from many centuries before.

On the contrary

, the practicality is often questioned in old

buildings

. Due to the fact that many factors that are necessary for nowadays plans are vital, were simply unknown back in decades ago, they are at the risk of many unfortunate disasters.

For example

, most modern

buildings

have several exits as well as automatic fire extinguisher systems.

Consequently

, during a fire emergency, not only the fire would be easily put out but

also

, people could evacuate in the process.

Thus

, we can deduct that reconstruction could help to increase the safety of our lives. In conclusion, maintaining old

buildings

have the advantage of attracting more foreign visitors while reconstructing them, has the merit of safety measures. I, personally, opine with the latter and believe the practicality of newer

buildings

is of the utmost importance.