The news article I read talks about changing a historical place in India into a replica of Times Square in New York. I think that the people in this article present a valid argument in saying that the landmark should stay the same because it is part of their history, but at the same time I believe that the place in India should change.
I understand that we should preserve history, but there comes a time where we have to move on. Technology and people move on everyday. We don't stay the same age forever and technology changes every single year. If I were an Indian citizen and I had the choice to vote on this I would vote for this area to be transformed into a Times Square. My choice would affect people in a negative or positive way, but I would be thinking about the long term affect and not the short term.
If Kala Ghoda were to be transformed into a Times Square I predict that tourism will double in the span of ten years, which will strengthen India's economy. More people will probably invest Indian companies, which will make the Indian government profit. By doing this many people might lose their homes and pollution will increase, but the future generations of India will have greater opportunity education wise.
This article made me think about how a lot of places have places like this, and they are preserved which limits that place's economy from improving because people want to hold onto the past.
Link of News Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/realestate/commercial/Development-of-Kala-Ghoda-in-Mumbai-Stirs-Controversy.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
No comments:
Post a Comment