Is it better for cities to preserve old buildings or replace them with new one?

Modern architecture will always be more valuable than ancient buildings, so I agree that the older buildings should be replaced with modern ones.

The main reason is the cost of preserving ancient buildings is too high, especially the wooden temples. They will easily lead to fires, and the money to maintain these buildings should be used for more important things, such as building high-tech centers or electronic amusement parks. So my point is modern skyscrapers will always be more effective. For one thing, they host more offices to play a better role in boosting the economy, and these modern landmarks should also attract city tourists and boost the local economy. So, again, I say modern buildings are the engine of economic gain, while older buildings are heavy financial burdens to the city and should be replaced.