|
Thecouncil of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped,is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existingfarmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such arestriction, by limiting the supply of new housing, could lead to significantincreases in the price of housing in the county. Proponents of the measure notethat Chestnut County established a similar measure ten years ago, and itshousing prices have increased only modestly since. However, opponents of themeasure note that Pine County adopted restrictions on the development of newresidential housing fifteen years ago, and its housing prices have since morethan doubled. The council currently predicts that the proposed measure, ifpassed, will result in a significant increase in housing prices in MapleCounty. From this argument, the author argues that,in order to prevent the overdevelopment of existing farmland in the county, thecouncil will propose to limit supply of new house, and he/she predicts that ifthe measure passed, the housing prices will increase significantly. However, Ithink author’s point has several serious flaws. First and foremost, Chestnut County’spractice contradicts with author’s conclusion. Based on the information,Chestnut County has established a similar measure several years ago, and thehousing price has only increased modestly. Thus, by adopting the restriction,housing price would probably stay nearly constant as what has happened inChestnut County. Also, author proposed another example fromPine county, where adopted restrictions on the development of housing and causedsignificant rise in house pricing. However, Maple County and Pine county mightnot be comparable. The population density might be bigger in Pine County thanin Maple County, therefore, the need for housing might be severe. Thus, lack ofmore information about both of the county, author cannot hastly draw theconclusion that adopting restrictions in Maple County would cause house pricingto increase as that happened in Pine County. Thirdly, the restrictions in Pine County wasadopted fifteen years ago, situations and circumstances might be changed overthe years. It is entirely possible that during the fifteen years, the need forhousing has dropped significantly so that even with the restriction on limitingsupply of new house will have trivial influence on the price. Last but not least, the council of MapleCounty’s ultimate goal was to prevent the development of existing farmland inthe county. To achieve this, there are many other effective approaches, suchas, subsiding companies who effectively utilize city land. To sum up, authors argument was full offlaws. Firstly, with the example of Pine County, author ignores the fact thatMaple County and Pine County might not be comparable. And the example ofChestnut County fortunately provided an opposing evidence. In addition, theremight be many other factors would contribute to increase in house pricing.Thus, without further information about Maple County and the restriction,author cannot hastily draw the conclusion that if adopting the restriction, thehousing price will increase significantly.
Ps.这是我随机选的一个题目来模拟的，所以并不是很典型。我觉得逻辑错误很难找，可能没找到重点，求各位指导。还有字数是368， 半小时。字数够了么？
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2014-9-20 08:04:27
收藏
收藏
