Some people think that certain old buildings are more worth preserving than other ones. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people believe that specific old

buildings

are more valuable to preserve than other ones. In my opinion, only those that hold history and benefit should be conserved. First of all, I believe that old

buildings

that contain historic moments should be taken care of as a priority. To clarify, old establishments with history could be too important to demolish. It could have memories of a whole generation.

For example

, the iconic temple Taj Mahal in India is a record of its beauty and its complex architecture. Other monuments,

such

as churches, mosques, etc consist of historical importance.

Secondly

, preserving particular old establishments can contribute to profits

to

Change preposition

for

show examples

the local community. To explain,

buildings

that give a sense of heritage that has been going on for generations could create discern beauty and peace.

Moreover

, it might attract tourists to visit and appreciate the cultural value.

This

could boost the local economic opportunities.

For instance

, public

buildings

made of marble or cobblestone or even a small residential area mainly surrounded by nature, could allure investors and civilians and make large sums of profit. In conclusion,

although

some structures don't hold value and importance,

however

, many of them have links to the past and could hold memories of a certain era.

Therefore

, these structures should be carefully selected and prioritized to maintain their inherent worth by the government.