Too much money is spent in maintaining and repairing old buildings, some people think they should be knocked down and give way to modem building. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is currently a contentious argument over ancient buildings should be maintained or demolished. In my opinion, I quite believe that old households have their values. This essay is going to analyze some comprehensive preferences to support my idea. On the one hand, it is undoubted that the ancient buildings contribute essential roles for historical span. In other words, these households are milestones for the human to rewind memorable timelines of their ancestors. Money, as a result, is aimed to invest to repair and protect these historical values. For example, Hue citadel, which is one of the most favourable tourist attractions in Hue city, used to be the Emperor place. It, therefore, should be maintained to protect a necessary part of Vietnamese culture. Moreover, people are more likely to be attracted to ancient buildings, thus, these households could make a significantly huge amount of money for the social foundation. On the other hand, there is a wide range of paths to construct modern buildings. What I mean by this is that instead of knocking down old houses, the government, as well as the organization, could establish high-end technological property in other rooms such as rural areas. In this way, it does not only protect cultural values but also bring more opportunities to the local dwellers. Taking Incheon Airport as an instance, the construction of this airport completely uses the remote property in Incheon city and creates numerous job promotions for the citizens. In conclusion, ancient buildings should be protected by time while there are still many ways to construct modern households. I personally disagree with the topic ideas through mentioned reasons