In recent years, some people think that having large public outdoor locations such as squares and parks is fundamentally important for all ctities and towns, while others believe that it is not vitally crucial. From my perspective, keeping parks can become a big problem because it would require a lot of money sustaining them, and homeless individuals would gather there.
It is quite money consuming to have natural places inside cities and towns because there are many expenditures like planting trees, keeping parks clean, and so on. Even though the expenditures will be covered, the number of visitors is likely to be low since many individuals have busy work schedules. For instance, in China, there was a survey about how many people go to parks and squares in their free time. This research revealed that less than a half of population of China go to the parks. And, the main reason was that the majority of China citizens have work to do.
On the other hand, parks are good places for homeless people. This is because there are many free facilities that the homeless can use. However, having homeless individuals inside the parks is an enormous issue for the government facilities because many people would be scared of visiting the parks if homeless individuals roamed and lived there. For example, numerous squares were constructed in American cities, but after a few weeks the homeless began living there, and scaring ordinary people. This problem significantly decreased the income, and having parks started not to be profitable for the goverment. In spite of the fact that the government tried to use some regualtions against homeless people, it did not work.
In conclusion, building natural places inside cities is a bad idea because a lot of money is likely to be wasted, and it would turn out to be a home for the homeless. That is why I strongly disagree with the given statement.