argument求狠批：乐队不给钱~~

theopenwindow

61 The following appeared in an article in the Grandview Beacon.

"For many years the city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony. Last year, however, private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. The symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. Given such developments, some city commissioners argue that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting, and they recommend that funding for the symphony be eliminated from next year's budget."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

In the argument, the author recommended to eliminate the funding for the symphnoy from next year's budget for mainly 3reasons: 1)the increased private contribution by 200percent last year;2)the doubled population of those participating in symphony's concerts-in-the -park;3) the anouncement for raising ticket's price for the next year. Even though seemingly reasonable and adequate, the recomnentation actually obtains correlative logical faults as below, which must be answered and proved with more evidences.


First of all, referring the increase from private contribution by 200percent, the author assumed that the fund of Symphony will climbed a lot, which will resolve its financial problems. However, does 200percent mean a lot increase in funding? What's the original contribution before the year? Perhaps, even though increase by 200 percent seems a large rais, the former financial aid was only one thousand, which will be three thousand after the 200percent increase. Actually it means no more than nothing for such a big bank like symphony. It may has the duty to entertain all the citizens and to educate some music knowledge to the youth., so much fund is essential for its run. Even though the increase means a lot, we have to ask whether it will last until the following years? Perhaps, only because of good benefit in last yeas, the private contribution was raised, with nothing to do with other years later. But the symphony will keep on after the year. So only aswering the questions how much the contribution last years were exactly and to what degree it could help resolve the financial problem of symphony, as well confirming whether the following money will be guaranteed, the reason can be proved to the ground.


Furthermore, we have to ask questions about the doubled attendance at the symphony's park concerts. Is the form of concert the regular running style of the bank? Is it a free programme only for promotion? If it is true, to how much degree it can help increase the attendance to the real concert? Maybe, after enjoying the performance in parks, fewer people attend the formal concert for saving money on tickets and time for it. Then not only it didn't help the increase in profit of symhony, but increased the financial burdon in that it cost much money for the preparation for the park concert. Thus, in order to make the proof more compelling, we should keep record about how many people participate the real concert only after listening their performance in the park. And we also make clear whether the additional profit will be more than the cost in park concert.


Thirdly, the promising raised tickets price was referred by the author in the argument. But we'll ask how much it will increase by the price? How much is the price now? If the price only increase from 10dollars to 11dollars, to how much degree, it can help the symphony. And if with economic inflation these years, correlative price cost in the playing position will increase a lot which can even not be met with the increased price. Even if the price will increase a lot while other cost keeping unchanged, won't many audiance never come to the concert for not affording the high price? And we also need know whether the price will increase the same as the announcement refferd. After all the reality has difference with the arrangement for future. So we should know the increased price and the audinces' attitude towards the decision. In that way, the reason can hold water.

普渡哥

地一段那样按序号列举不是特别好，因为有一次我在美国写作业，用这样的方式被老师狂批。美国人还是喜欢写成句子。

theopenwindow

这样啊，嗯，好的！