Foreign visitors should pay more than local visitors for cultural and historical attractions. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
It is irrefutable that every nation has a different culture and mysterious history. People are more willing to interact with this heritage and are curious to travel to various destinations with incredible specific backgrounds. International commuters should reimburse for historical monuments as compared with natives. However, I believe that despite facing the serious challenge of imposing a massive amount, foreign visitors still hold their position firmly. Several arguments can be presented to defend my opinion.
The first argument favouring international visitors is that it does not require additional charges to visit any country. This offers the visitors a high level of flexibility to easily move anywhere without facing any difficulties. For instance, international people easily interact with the history or culture they are seeking without extra charge. Furthermore, foreign commuters have immensely boosted the economy of the nations; this leads authorities easily manage the infrastructure or fulfil the basic need of the country with contributions best assessed through the visitors. To add, the staff gives tremendous benefits to increase the sales of local products worldwide. Other passengers also put their intentions towards the local locations once they would be treated the same as local people even without discrimination. So that no other medium is better than travellers in spreading the popularity of historical events in the countries. Finally, in many parts of the world, people still do not have sufficient funding to spend additional charges to explore various places; if government impose the fees same as local people thus leads thousands of visitors to come forward and show their interest in the specific locations which has a deep history of the nation.
It is implied that the appetite for international travellers should pay more money to visit historical attractions to preserve these precious buildings conveniently because the maintenance of old structures is quite expensive, and a government is unable to invest massive funds to keep the building alive for a long time. Through the foreign passengers, there is the possibility of regular updates and rapid access to many people to know the history of about country. For example, India is a land of monuments, so the Indian government took the initiative to surge the prices of old buildings for international visitors. These practices help to protect these monuments with the funding of immigrants. Therefore, I believe that the government needs to consider this case related to overseas commuters and hike the charges with a nominal margin that has no impact on their financials.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, inclined, the charges of international visitors have not to lead to any decline in the circulation of visitors. It is still going great, Guns. The situation might get change in future. However, when would hope and imagine that oversees visitors gradually surge and would be no space for local people in the days to come and enhance the condition of every country and remove the deprivation from the nation.
Follow Us on IELTSTrend Twitter