求助本月机经里的房地产投资的那个AA思路……

Monkey43

The following appeared in a realtor’s brochure in a large city:
“Now is the perfect time to buy a house in our city. Over the past five years, average home prices in our region have nearly doubled. But average stock prices in the national stock market have actually declined over the same period. So homeowners have seen an increase in value for their housing investment during the last five years that far exceeds what they could have made by investing in the stock market. Our city’s residents can surely achieve a similar profit over the next five years. Furthermore, if residents invest in a home, they can enjoy the use of the home while its value increases, whereas money invested in stocks would not contribute to their quality of life in the same way that owning a home would. Therefore, all the residents of our city should invest their money in a home.”

刚开始复习AWA不久，对AA不是很熟……暂时只想到一点，求教~

koyti

up up 求nn

uwants

我自己套了模板临时写了一篇,其实攻击两点我觉得也够了, eoe

In this argument, the author concludes that all the residents in the city should invest their money in a home rather than stocks. To support his conclusion, the author points out that over the past five years, average home prices in his region have nearly doubled while average stock prices in the national stock market have actually declined; thus the increase in value for housing investment far exceeds investment in the stock market. In addition, the author reasons that residents can surely achieve a similar profit over the next five years by investing in real estate. Furthermore, the arguer assumes that that investment in home would contribute better quality of life than the investment in stocks. At first glance, the author’s argument appears to be somehow appealing, while a close examination will reveal how groundless it is. This argument is problematic for the following reasons.





In the first place, this argument commits a fallacy of all things are equal. The author assumes without justification that all background conditions have remained the same at different times and investor can achieve a similar profit over the next five years.. However, it is not clear in this argument whether the current conditions and the conditions in the next five years are the same as they used to be over the past five years. Nor does the author cite any evidence to support this assumption. Actually, if the investment conditions changes the next five years, the investors might not achieve similar profits. For example, the change of the country’s economy policy could bring a turning point of both real estate and stock market, the price of house could fall sharply while the price of stock might keep soaring and this result will prove that investment suggestion by the author is totally flawed. Thus, it is impossible to conclude that residents in that city can surely achieve a similar profit over the next five years.



In the second place, this argument depends on gratuitous assumption that investment in home would contribute quality of life. However, the assumption is questionable because the author provides no evidence to support this argument. The arguer fails to take into account other facts that might contribute to quality of life. It is likely that people just invest on a house rather than stay in that house, so people can not enjoy the use of home at all and this kind of investment will not help contribute to their quality of life; It is also likely that the harmony of a family is the key fact that contributes to quality of life. Any of these scenarios, if true, would undermine the arguer’s assumption. Therefore, this argument is unwarranted without ruling out such possibility.



(In the third place, this argument commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. The author provides no evidence that doubled price in home and declined price in stock caused increase in value of housing investment and less of stocks. In fact, the author has obviously neglected the possibility of other alternative facts. For example, the location of house plays a more important role in real estate: a good location can bring value increase and a poor location might generate counter effect; Although the average price (Index) of stock market declined, some stock’s price can rise because the company runs a better business or provide attractive dividend. Unless the author rules out other factors relevant to the investment, this assumption in question can not be accepted.)



To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evident cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the author claims. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more information that residents can surely get similar profits in the next five years. The arguer should also demonstrate that home can contribute residents’ quality of life to make this argument logically acceptable.