henderyluu
Sep 2, 2021
Writing Feedback / WRITING TASK 2: Should government funding be used for new house instead of restoring old building ? [7]
Arguments regarding cities' infrastructure developments have gained much contemporary attention in recent years. A large amount of public budget being allocated for old buildings' refurbishments has raised much opposition since it is believed to be more worthy to spend such funding on building more houses and roads. From my perspective, I believe that the government funding should not be utterly focused on any development, but should be evenly divided for both such purposes.
To commence with, constructing modern buildings and roads is claimed to be a superior mission for a range of factors. The first underlying reason behind this proposal is the proliferating demands of accommodations in metropolises nowadays. Owing to the urbanization occurring significantly in cities, dramatic escalations have been recorded in the numbers of urban populations and as a result, more houses are needed in order to accommodate citizens. Besides, establishing new streets may deliver social advantages, as well as the improvement in road safety. As new roads are introduced in municipalities, city-dwellers are presented with a plethora of options to travel during rush hours, which results in a significant reduction in the rate of traffic jams. Moreover, the figures of road accidents can be mitigated once overcrowding in particular roads is eradicated.
On the other hand, renovating antique buildings in cities should also be placed emphasis on for several reasons. Firstly, such old institutions can become promising sources of income for cities. According to a survey, foreign travelers are inclined to visit and take pictures of local ancient and historical places; therefore, old buildings can be seen as cities' potential tourist sites. As a result, huge revenues can be made regularly by commercializing such constructions. Secondly, historical institutions can heavily stimulate artists' inner creativity with their antique beauty and underlying stories. For instance, a rich variety of pieces of fine arts were inspired by the image and structure, as well as the history of the famous One Pillar Pagoda in Hanoi and undoubtedly, they are highly appreciated and acclaimed by both the public and the critics.
In conclusion, weighing both sides of the argument, I wholeheartedly believe that constructing new houses and roads as well as restoring old institutions are equally crucial in the development of cities and therefore, even amounts of money should be spent on both purposes.
Funds for architectural infrastructure
Arguments regarding cities' infrastructure developments have gained much contemporary attention in recent years. A large amount of public budget being allocated for old buildings' refurbishments has raised much opposition since it is believed to be more worthy to spend such funding on building more houses and roads. From my perspective, I believe that the government funding should not be utterly focused on any development, but should be evenly divided for both such purposes.
To commence with, constructing modern buildings and roads is claimed to be a superior mission for a range of factors. The first underlying reason behind this proposal is the proliferating demands of accommodations in metropolises nowadays. Owing to the urbanization occurring significantly in cities, dramatic escalations have been recorded in the numbers of urban populations and as a result, more houses are needed in order to accommodate citizens. Besides, establishing new streets may deliver social advantages, as well as the improvement in road safety. As new roads are introduced in municipalities, city-dwellers are presented with a plethora of options to travel during rush hours, which results in a significant reduction in the rate of traffic jams. Moreover, the figures of road accidents can be mitigated once overcrowding in particular roads is eradicated.
On the other hand, renovating antique buildings in cities should also be placed emphasis on for several reasons. Firstly, such old institutions can become promising sources of income for cities. According to a survey, foreign travelers are inclined to visit and take pictures of local ancient and historical places; therefore, old buildings can be seen as cities' potential tourist sites. As a result, huge revenues can be made regularly by commercializing such constructions. Secondly, historical institutions can heavily stimulate artists' inner creativity with their antique beauty and underlying stories. For instance, a rich variety of pieces of fine arts were inspired by the image and structure, as well as the history of the famous One Pillar Pagoda in Hanoi and undoubtedly, they are highly appreciated and acclaimed by both the public and the critics.
In conclusion, weighing both sides of the argument, I wholeheartedly believe that constructing new houses and roads as well as restoring old institutions are equally crucial in the development of cities and therefore, even amounts of money should be spent on both purposes.
