AA032请牛牛看看，谢谢

谢谢先

32. The following appeared in the editorial section of a West Cambria newspaper.

“A recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service.”

The conclusion made in the above editorial is that West Cambria should replace their volunteer service by a commercial ambulance service. To substantiate it, the arguer cite their paper’s recent review as an example. The paper reported that the reason lead to its conclusion is that average response time of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service was longer to that of a commercial ambulance squad in East Cambria. This argument, in my opinion, flaw in three aspects outlined bellow.

On the first place, the assumption in this argument is not sufficient to validate the conclusion. The only evidence is the comparison between a volunteer ambulance service and a commercial one. After reading this argument we could only find vague and unwarranted supports. Since two ambulances are in two locations, the arguer fail to report whether the basis of comparison is equal, such as the time period for comparison, the location of the two ambulance and frequency of the incidence. Lacking the comparable premises the arguer fails to convince us about his conclusion.

On the second place, the auger oversimplified the cause and the result. Iｎ

这个和前面的时态不一致

other words, the arguer fail to rule out other possibilities .For example, if 90% ambulance service occurred during rush hour in West ambulance that the longer response time is due to the traffic jam but not the ambulance service’ teams own matter. Thus, if the government of the West just follows the paper’s suggestion to hire a commercial one, they could not only solve the problem but also waste the government’s fund for other utilities.

Last but not the least, the arguer’s plan to raise revenue from commercial

我原来也以为有the的，可是好象应该没有

ambulance is problematic. It is ironically to raise large portion of the government revenue from accident service fee unless the accident rate is extremely high or the charge rate of service is a large percentage. In my point of view, raise revenue is not a valid reason to disband the volunteer ambulance service.

As the analysis I made above, I could not draw the same conclusion mealy

是想用merely吗？

based on the inadequate evidence mentioned in the title statement. To support his argument, the author should not only base his comparison on same condition but also rule out other factors that will influence on the conclusion. Furthermore the arguer should reevaluate his argument about feasibility of his purpose to raise revenue.