The Restoration of old buildings in major cities around the world costs governments billions of dollars while this money should have been used for new housing and road development.To what extent do you agree or disagree to this statement?

In contemporary times, the development in technology has led to modernization of the world. Government and other ruling authorities spend an extravagant amount of money in improving the infrastructure of major cities. This involves rennovation of historic bulidings for the purpose of accomodation and changing the view of cities. However, some believe that this money should be spent on new housing schemes and roads. I advocate this ideology for various reasons. To commence with, increasing economic instability in the developing countries, is a leading cause of depleting governments' resources. Restoration of old properties involves increasing consumption of electrical energy and power. This results in diminishing countries' fuel to survive. For instance, many buildings in Karachi were renewed in 2013 and it was followwed by massive load shedding in major cities of the country. Furthermore, newly built settlements have the benefit of surviving natural hazardous, such as earthquakes and floods, partly due to advancement in technology. In contrast, old buildings are more prone to detrimental effects of environmental breakdown. For instance, most old structures in Turkey were destroyed during last year due to earthquake. To conclude, rennovating aged establishments require time and energy, whereas, introducing new buildings in a city, reflects systematic approach and can be lucrative to public. Government should spend its resources in a more wiser way.