Foreign visitors should pay more than local visitors for cultural and historical attractions. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, traveling plays a vital role to enhance one's knowledge and to explore new things. However, it is believed that overseas visitors should spend more money compares to the local cisitors for cultural as well as historical attractions. I partially agree with the statement and reasons behind my inclination are articulated in the subsequent paragraphs. To embark with, traveling is fun activity to do and it provides a chance to have new experiences. Making forigners to pay more will help the host nation to boost the economy of the country. Spending money on travel, accommodation and many more will provide employement to local people therefore they can manage to earn enough to pass their day. Furthermore, many ancient sites remained unnoticable thus, government should promote this arena to showcase its memerizing beauty. For instance, country such as India, is a diverse in its culture and historic places where guests are considered as god therefore one can experience great hospitality by visiting it. Apart from this, increasing cost to observe the beauty of the nation will result in negative way. However, decline in the number of foreign travellers Can be observed. Consequently, they have to manage the expanses including travel, accommodation and food, they might nat visit the country. The economy will be affected along with that raise in unemployement can be seen. Moreover, owing to the decline of tourism department, the unnoticed area will retained as history, as it does not get in people's sight. For instance, an article in Times of India stated that a country named France raised expenses of travellers faced huge lost in the tourism department as the tourists were reduced by 50 per cent. To conclude, government should raise little bit thus every foreign can afford it and it will not affect the economy