To debate over whether to prioritize constructing new buildings or maintaning existing one is multifeceted issue. Although most of people opine preserve of old uilding is just wasting money, I riggidly oppose that because of some reasonable isuue that I will elobrate in the further paragraphs.
First, because of cultural and historical value of old building must be maintainence. The Eiffle Tower is the best example for expanding my idea. It was constructe in the 18th century and requires to regulare maintanence to address wear and tears, corrosion, and structural intergrity but it is not useless and this processes ensure its longevity and now it is as global icon which attracts millions of tourists each year that caueses milions dollar yearly income for french government.
My seccond point is, the preservig current building could be fruithful for environmental sustainability which is one of the crutial global challenges. For illustration, the first step of any building construction is the demolition of old buildings that generates substantial waste, which often ends up in landfills that maintaining and retrofitting existing structures minimizes this waste. Moreover, as you might have heard the construction industry is a major contributor to carbon emissions; therefore, by maintaining existing buildings and reduce the new construction, the associated emissions is reduced.
To sum up, according to the all above mentioned reasons, I strongly belive the upsides of the maintaing the old building is more than to construct new ones. The way I see it, it is not only wasting money, but also is a rich resource to decrease the expences in multiaspects.