It is too expensive to look after and repair old buildings. This money should be spent on building modern buildings instead. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? v.5

There is no doubt that dilapidated buildings do require care and money for timely maintenance, but complete gentrifications cannot be the solution for this problem. I partially agree with the statement. This essay will discuss both the sides of this opinion with relevant ideas along with the supporting examples. Some run down structures have aesthetic value, and are a glimpse of our glorious past. These places are tourist attraction and generate enough foreign exchange to cover their renovation cost. For instance, the Taj Mahal and other heritages the most famous tourist destination in Agra have symbolic value, every year a large amount of money is being spent to keep their beauty intact. These historic monuments should be refurbished as these structures exhibit a strong connection with our ancestors. Therefore, these old buildings cannot be replaced by the modern buildings. On the other hand, superseding deteriorated edifice by a mall can bring employment and monetary gains. It is a basic human tendency to be attracted to a new shopping complex and eatery. If these newly constructed skyscrapers are used for these purposes, more jobs will be available. Like in the USA, for the country's development and to create work for the people, government for the well being of the civilians have supermarket and hotels constructed. Hence, necessary expenditure can be avoided in these places. In the conclusion, a wise decision should be taken keeping in mind the nation’s economy. Considering the above factors the authorities should come to the verdict if the infrastructure need demolition or preservation.