The restoration of old buildings in major cities in the world costs numerous governments' expenditure. This money should be used in new housing and road development. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is true that a huge amount of revenue is spent on the preservation of historic architecture by

governments

.

While

some assert that authorities should invest in transportation and building new housing rather than protecting old constructions, I believe that

governments

should play a role in both of them. On the one hand, I can understand why it is argued that road development and new housing should be invested in. The construction of public housing can enormously improve the quality of life and help to curb the inflation rate.

For example

, since the price of housing is sky-high, a great number of young adults suffer from

this

and they are unable to afford a house and build a family.

Therefore

,

governments

should take responsibility

to provide

Change preposition

for providing

show examples

affordable housing to citizens.

Besides

, it is common to see traffic congestion in metropolises all around the world.

As a result

, investment by authorities in improving road conditions is needed.

On the other hand

,

however

, protecting historic buildings is important and

governments

should invest in their restoration as well.

Firstly

, old buildings can be seen as a connection with cultural identity. Residents and tourists can learn the history, cultures and customs of a nation by visiting old architecture.

Secondly

, by restoring these ancient buildings, the tourism industry can benefit and

this

creates a large number of employment opportunities.

For instance

, the Forbidden City is a symbol of China and it attracts millions of sightseers every year. In conclusion, I believe that

governments

should invest not only in providing more housing and improving road conditions but

also

in preserving historic constructions.