▶ Your Answer : Some people might argue that government should spend money constructing new houses rather than preserving historic buildings, while others do not. Both arguments may have their own reasons to support their views. If I had to choose one, I would say that goverment has to invest more money on preserving historic buildings than constructing new houses.
First of all, if the goverment would not take care of historic buildings and just manage new houses, it brings safety problem for people. As time goes by, buildings become more weak and it can be very danagerous to people staying there. People can feel unconfortable and afraid of these unsafety environments. The old building can be destroyed by small winds or attacked by strangers. I saw the news related this issue this morning. In China, the one stranger throwed the smoke on the road, it fired the old building and finally about ten people died from this accident. So I think that goverment has to manage historic buildings more than new building.
Also, maintaning old buildings increases the overall happiness of people. Nowadays, people are living in a meritocracy world, so they get a lot of stress. If they can see beautiful historic buildings while on the way to work or school, they feel happiness and can refresh their minds. And, it can brings more travlers, finally it increases the economy of the city. When I dicided to the country and city for travels, I and my friends choose Paris because of it's athetic benefits. There are a lot of beutiful old buildings. If they were not, we may not visit there and choice other places. Many travelers also choice the city for a such a reason.
To sum up, I believe that my explanations above sufficiently prove the advantage of spending more money on historic building than new houses. Obviously, the significance of safety issues and happiness of people firmly show that managing old buildings will be benefit them more in the future.
|