Money ought to be spent on new public buildings such as museums or town halls rather than renovating existing ones. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

A debate has been always been on how to support cultural constructs. Though one idea suggests that the money should be spent on constructing new buildings like

museums

and town halls

instead

of renovating previous ones. There are many defining factors that can make

this

a good decision or a bad one. Those who agree with

this

idea say that having more buildings and public

places

provide more job opportunities, though many youngsters could get employed. In spite of that, constructing new structures around the city, which are aimed at making public attractions to be dotted around the city can attract more people who have not been living near any

museums

or public

places

.

On the other hand

, many others disagree with

this

idea and think that we should renovate the existing public constructs. By focusing on public

places

, which are already there, and have lost their visitors we can be more successful.

For example

, old

museums

that roughly have visitors can be renovated to gain back people's attraction. More significant, important old landmarks and cultural

places

should not be ignored, because they are so important to a country's history.

For instance

, a well-known landmark like Achaemenids which has been aged is being destroyed by rain and winds, so, it's going to vanish in the near future if we don't renovate it. In conclusion, building more public

places

and

museums

can attract more visitors,

however

, we should not ignore existing cultural

places

. In my opinion, as there is always little money provided to support our culture, we should spend it wisely and renovate our historical monuments rather than building new buildings that no one is going to visit.