Whether the restoration of ancient buildings in major cities is worth an investment or not is a matter of great concern. Some people opine that this investment is wasting national expenditure and such money should be earmarked for other purposes such as building new houses and traffic systems. From my perspective, I partly agree with this point of view due to the following reasons.
On the one hand, it is essential for cities to conserve old construction. It reflects an overall picture of the history of a typical region, which is worth investing in. 36 ancient streets of Hanoi can serve as an exemplification. The history of Hanoi has been displayed on each street, where old buildings reflect Hanoian’s previous life. Each street is named after the handicraft that its citizens used to do for a living. This location has significant value in both cultural and historical aspects, and many ancient buildings in this place have become tourist attractions, generating revenue for the local authorities.
On the other hand, dwellers of main cities have to deal with a variety of difficulties due to the overload, in that, lack of accommodations and inadequate road facilities are alarming issues. That the authorities should distribute the budget to build new houses and roads is justifiable since degraded houses, slums, and traffic congestion will be tackled, increasing citizen’s living standard and making cities themself more beautiful and civilized. For instance, many sustainable house projects organized by the government have assisted low-income laborers in having more spacious homes.
In conclusion, the preservation of antique buildings is of equal importance to the construction of living areas and traffic systems in major cities, requiring the same investment by the government so that such cities are always iconic and liveable locations