International tourist should pay more than the local visitor for cultural and historical attractions. Do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, communities residing in different nations have hard contrasting views about differences between the foreign caller and federation payments for historical or cultural places. Some believe that international foreigners must pay more opening fees than the local public. I totally agree with

this

statement. In the beginning, these tourist attractions are financial sources for most governments. For,

this

reason foreigners should pay passageway compensation. But,

this

cost might be cheaper for the federation of the state because these nations live there and the places they visit are part of their own culture or history.

For example

, every country has a special place for their history so every citizen can visit there easily to understand the importance of that place. And

also

there is a statement called social state in the constitution which means countries should help their society with their social life. It consists the historical or tourist travels. In my ,view historical knowledge is the primary important thing for the federation.

On the other hand

, visitors can pay

this

commission easily because of the exchange rates.

For instance

, most visitors want to spend money when they are travelling so they are open to high prices. Travellers should have money to spend on it so they can afford the access fees. For these ,reasons foreign guests should pay much more fees than the local community. In a nutshell, governments should take more money from international sightseers for both economic and historical knowledge for their humans. And for

this

source states can take less entryway bill from the local caller. So, in my ,opinion

this

statement is fully correct.