Some people think that it is good to preserve old buildings whenever possible. Other people think that it is preferable to construct new buildings. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

After some minimal preservation, old buildings often can be used for living,

due to

the precision of professional ancient architects. In

this

essay, I will discuss whether preserving old buildings is good, or constructing new ones is preferable. Human history is full of famous buildings from the prehistoric era, till our present days. Architecture is as old, as mankind is,

therefore

people in Italy,

for example

, still can use routine roads, built in the Roman era, or we can buy old castles with vineyards, which were used by nobles a few hundred years ago.

First,

we must decide, when worth to keep an old building, rather than demolishing it. Generally, if the structure is still capable to give back the original function without any damage, and the historical value is high enough,

then

renovation is the preferable choice for the building. We have a lot of small castles in Hungary, built in the 17th century, which have been renovated properly by the government, and they are still functioning as a museum. On the other side we have to declare, that without any historical value, stable condition, uniqueness, or proper function, an old building remains an old building, nothing more. So basically, spending money to preserve, or save them, is a waste of time, in my opinion.

Moreover

, in

this

case, building a new construction

instead

is more affordable. In conclusion, the historical value is the keyword, which determines the

further

life of a structure. If the building is unique and important for archaeologists to keep the history alive in it,

then

every penny is worth filling in.

Otherwise

, it is a waste of money.