In cities, spaces for housing should be created by knocking down historic buildings. What is your opinion?

In the modern era of times, accommodation is a serious issue in urban areas because people are increasing at an alarming rate and there is not enough land remaining to build the skyscraper.

However

, it is thought that housing spaces can be created by demolishing the historical infrastructures of cities. I completely disagree with

such

thinking due to the rock-solid advantages of historic

buildings

.

First

of all, different ancient structures can be used to teach children about native cultures. I mean primitive archaeological establishments, say, palaces, monuments, and so on reflect the culture of a nation and by visiting

such

places a child can gather knowledge about their ancient culture in a better way rather than simply studying history books. I can make an example that better support

this

statement. Tanvir, a nephew of mine, secured a high grade for his exam because he visited a lot of historical places in Bangladesh, and in

this

way, he enriched his knowledge about history.

Secondly

, ancient infrastructures could be a treasure trove for governments.

That is

to say, a government can preserve these

buildings

and can develop a museum.

As a result

, they can increase their disposable income,

for instance

, by selling tickets, and

also

by arranging auctions.

Therefore

, primitive

buildings

could be a great source for a country. To sum up, it must be said that historic infrastructures should not be knocked down because they can be used to teach children about native culture and it can be a great earning source for the government. But, whenever it comes to the question of accommodation of ever-expanding people of cities, I suggest the administration should tackle

this

issue by expanding urban areas rather than demolishing historic

buildings

.