Prompt: People think that old buildings should be knocked down and give way to modern buildings. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Traditional and contemporary style buildings both are equally vital for society. Whereas old ones are a symbol of culture and heritage, modern ones are a sign of development. Although few people reckon that new buildings should be build after demolishing the old ones, I radically disagree with this notion. Ċ Firstly, these traditional buildings represent the culture of the nation. These are the national assets which should be preserved for future generations. If these are knocked, people would not be aware of the historical values of monuments. For instance, some buildings were constructed by past emperors. People get knowledge about their sacrifices and learn through these. Modern generation requires to visit these places to understand the past of their nation and country. Therefore, these should be maintained well with maximum care. Ċ Secondly, these are the source of income for the country. Myriad of tourists visits to watch these enormous monuments built by rulers. They pay the ticket price to enter the place which is a revenue source for the nation. This income can be increased by small investment too, but completely knocking will be a huge loss. Further, few countries have historical heritages which attract travellers from different countries. For example, Taj Mahal is a well-known ubiquitously, thousands of travellers visit India just to take a glimpse of this. The arrival of spectators boost the economy and spike the national income. Hence, these have economical benefits. Ċ In a nutshell, modern buildings are vital but should not be built in place of old ones. In my perspective, old buildings should not be knocked down.