Government should spend less money on restoring old buildings and more for new housing and roads development. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Government should spend less money on restoring old buildings and more for new housing and roads development. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Municipalities must not use their resources in reviving the old building instead of using them for building new housing and refurbishment of roads. I partly agree with the aforementioned statement. In this expository paragraph, my essay will expatiate my stance with some lucid examples.

To commence with, it would be easier to build fresh houses and roads then restore the old structure whose design has become outdated. Because of this many ancient buildings in England have been fenced and the general public is prohibited to go around them. Firstly, the older the structure is, the more difficult and costly it is to revamp it. Secondly new pathways and sides for cars and residence need more fresh areas to build. For example, according to the world’s economy, it is stated that restoring historical buildings needs more than half of the country’s funds.

Nevertheless, on the other hand, old buildings are critical in identifying the location. For instance, in Italy they used historical places for tourists in order to explore them. Ancient buildings are core to learning history. It would be difficult to go around a building where one cannot find any long standing structure. To illustrate, the people of Jauharabad have been living over there for a long time, but still they used the train station as a starting point to explore the metropolis without getting lost.

To conclude, it is ideal and much wiser in believing to construct new houses and roads compared to wasting funds on old structures, however, the ancient buildings have their own fandom in preserving the heritage.