还有20天就考试了，借此地督促自己写作文~~

kammyxiong

Thefollowing appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper.

“Commuter use of the new subway trainis exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of theshuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below theprojected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttlebuses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttlebus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations.”

Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

The argument first states that commuter use of the new subway train is surpassingits projected volume while the use of the shuttle buses is considerably under itspredicted volume. Thus, the author argues that the transit company should chooseto either lower the shuttle bus fees or raise the parking price at the subwaystation to spur commuters to take the shuttle bus to the station rather thandrive there. At first glance, this claim appears to be reasonable, but after aclose inspection, the argument has some serious logic flaws.

Firstly, the author unfairly assumes thatcommuters must make a choice between two alternatives, which are not mutuallyexclusive. However, the argument fails to rule out the possibility that it may work better if the commuter company adopts both ofthe two strategies simultaneously. Moreover, the author only considers two waysas the stimulation to motivatethe commuters to take the shuttle buses. Actually, the most effective solutionmay include other factors, such as providing better service on buses, buildingmore bus-stops so that the drives can pick up and drop off commuters conveniently,and so on. In any event, the assumption is notconvincing without taking into account other options.

Secondly, the author assumes that commutersdrive to the subway rather than take buses is the sole factor to the low volumeof the use of the shuttle bus. However, driving a lot is a seemingly importantfactor, but it is not the only and necessarily required one. There may be othercrucial reasons such as inappropriate schedules, bad sanitary conditions, andso on. For instance, there may be crowded buildingsthat are near the subway station, which takes the commuters no more than a fewminutes to reach the station. That is to say, there is no need to usethe shuttle buses and apparently the transit company provides more shuttlebuses than that are actually in need. Consequently, the solution mentioned inthe argument will not influence the volume of the shuttle. Without accountingfor such potential factors, the author concludes too hastily that decreasingprivate driving can lead to the increasing use of the shuttle buses.

Insum, the argument is not as compelling as it seems to be because the authoroversimplifies both the problem and its possible solutions. To make this argument more tenable, the author would have to examine all factors that might account for the shuttle’sunpopularity. Additionally, more effectivesolutions should be considered to determine which one would bring about thegreatest increase in shuttle use. Only with more concrete and reliableevidence could this argument become more convincing.

kammyxiong

The following editorial appeared in the Elm City paper.
“The construction last year of a shopping mall in downtown Oak City was a mistake. Since the mall has opened, a number of local businesses have closed, and the downtown area suffers from an acute parking shortage, and arrests for crime and vagrancy have increased in the nearby Oak City Park. Elm City should pay attention to the example of the Oak City mall and deny the application to build a shopping mall in Elm City.”(新题)

The argument claims that the Elm City should not build a shopping mall because of what has happened in the Ock city after the Ock opened a shopping mall last year. The author first states that many local businesses have closed, the parking place have became in sharp shortage, and many serious social problems have arised since the mall's opening. In addition, the author predicts that these problems would happen in the Elm City if it builds a shopping mall . At first glance, this argument appears to be convincing, but after a close inspection, there are some serious logic flaws in the claim.

Firstly, the author makes a faulty analogy between the Oak City and the Elm City. Even though they have the same characteristics->(are similar) in some aspects, the discrepancies may outweigh their similarities. Indeed, they may be two totally different cities. For example, some factors such as the economic situation, the population density, and the transportation condition are not identical in the two cities. It is quite possible that the crime and vagrancy would decline rather than increase, because the opening of a shopping mall may prompt the development of society and economy in Elm City. Therefore, the analogy drawn between the two cities is doubtful and the assumption is groundless without taking into account such discrepancies.

Secondly, the argument commits the "After this, Therefore, Because of this" fallacy where the author assumes that because several problems, such as shortage of the parking slots, and the bankruptcy of the local businesses, emerged after the shopping mall's opening, the former is responsible for the latter. However, the fact that something occurred after the mall's opening is not sufficient to establish a causal relationship. Moreover, there may be other factors that could have caused these problems mentioned in the argument. For example, the local businesses have closed just because they provide bad service to their customers. When it comes to the acute shortage in downtown area, maybe->perhaps many people are getting much richer so that they can afford new cars, and consequently there is not enough parking place for those new cars. In any event, it is unreasonable to conclude that the opening of the shopping mall and these issues are causally related.

In sum, this argument is not compelling as it seems to be. It is hasty and inappropriate for the author to make the conclusion presented. To make this claim more tenable, the author would have to provide more evidence to prove that the two cities alike(resemble is a verb) in all aspects. In addition, more evidence should be offered to substantiate a causal relationship between the mall's opening and the problems. Only with more concrete and reliable information could this argument become more convincing.

kammyxiong

62. The following appeared as part of an article in the business section of a local newspaper.
“The Cumquat Cafe made a mistake in moving to a new location. After one year at the new spot, it is doing about the same volume of business as before, but the owners of the RoboWrench plumbing supply wholesale outlet that took over its old location are apparently doing better: RoboWrench is planning to open a store in a neighboring city.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.


The argument claims that it is not wise for the Cumquat cafe to move a new location. To support this argument, the author first points out that the sales in the new location does not increase. However, the RoboWrench plumbing store which took place of the Cumquat Cafe in the old location does a good job and plans to open a new store in a neighboring city. At first glance, this argument appeals to be plausible, but after a close inspection, there are some serious login flaws.

Firstly, the author assumes that the volume of the sales in Cumquat Cafe would increase if the Cumquat Cafe store didn't move to a new location. However, the assumption is unwarranted. There may be some factors that motivate the Cumquat Cafe to move away. For example, the Cumquat Cafe was the only cafe in the old location for a long time, but many new cafe stores opened in its vicinity last year. Therefore, people have many choices when they want to go out for coffee or dinner, and consequently it is hard for the Cumquat Cafe to gain the same profit in the old location. In other words, the Cumquat Cafe is successful and benefits a lot from moving to a new spot to keep its profit stable as before.

Secondly, the argument makes a false analogy between the cafe store and the plumbing store where the author predicts that the Cumquat Cafe will definitively increase its volume of business and open a new store in other cities just as what the RoboWrench plumbing store did. The author neglects that they are totally two different industries and there are considerably large discrepancies between them. For instance, the Cumquat Cafe is a place for people to relax and entertain, while the RoboWrench plumbing is a store to supply some necessaries of life for people. Moreover, the Cumquat Cafe is a mature business, but the RoboWrench plumbing is at its initial stage and needs a rapid development. The argument is groundless without taking into account such discrepancies.

Furthermore, the assertion that the RoboWrench is doing better is unfounded by the sole fact that it is going to open a store in a neighboring city. For example, it is very possible that the other city is in a acute shortage of such stores. Or perhaps the owner of the RoboWrench just made a stupid decision to open another store.
  
To sum up, this argument is not as compelling as it seems to be. It is hasty and inappropriate for the author to make a conclusion that the Cumquat Café made a mistake in moving to a new location. To make this conclusion more tenable, the author would have to provide more evidence to prove that the Cumquat Café would do better as the RoboWrench plumbing if it stayed in the old location. Only with more concrete and reliable information could this argument become more convincing.

kammyxiong

40. The following appeared as part of an article in a weekly newsmagazine.
“The country of Sacchar can best solve its current trade deficit problem by lowering the price of sugar, its primary export. Such an action would make Sacchar better able to compete for markets with other sugar-exporting countries. The sale of Sacchar’s sugar abroad would increase, and this increase would substantially reduce Sacchar’s trade deficit.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

The argument claims that the Sacchar can effectively solve its deficit problem by decreasing the price of sugar. To support this argument, the author first points out that the Sacchar will compete and defeat its counterparts because of the low price of sugar, and then the author assumes that the increase in the sales of sugar would reduce the Sacchar's trade deficit. At first glance, this argument appears to be plausible, but after a close inspection, there are some serious logic flaws.

Firstly, the author assumes that lowering the price of sugar can cause the increase in income. However, this assumption is groundless without more concrete evidence provided. To begin with, it is very possible that other sugar-exporting countries would lower the price of sugar as well, and consequently price is not the primary element for other countries to decide whether to import sugars from the Sacchar.  Moreover, if other-exporting countries supply sugars with higher quality as well as competitive price, and the global demand for sugar is small, then lowering price alone would have a negligible impact to the sales of sugar. In addition, even if the total sales increased, the revenue of sugar would not increase because of the loss in income cause by its low price.

Secondly, the author predicts that the increase in sales of sugar would solve the deficit problem. However, the trade deficit problem, which means the Sacchar spends more on imports than it earns from exports, is oversimplified in this argument. Not only the exports but also the imports will influence the trade deficit. Even if it were the case that lowering the price of sugar considerably increases the exports, the deficit problem cannot be solved if the cost in imports outweigh the profit of exports. So there is no benefit for the Sacchar to improve its trade deficit.

To sum up, this argument is not as compelling as it seems to be. It is hasty and inappropriate for the author to make the conclusion that it is the best way to solve the deficit problem by lowering the price of sugar. To make this argument more tenable, more concrete and reliable evidence should be provide to substantiate that lowering the price can lead to increased sales, which, in turn, can increase the export revenue, and solve the deficit problems.

kammyxiong

1. The following appeared as part of the business plan of an investment and financial consulting firm.
“Studies suggest that an average coffee drinker’s consumption of coffee increases with age, from age 10 through age 60. Even after age 60, coffee consumption remains high. The average cola drinker’s consumption of cola, however, declines with increasing age. Both of these trends have remained stable for the past 40 years. Given that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, it follows that the demand for coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease during this period. We should, therefore, consider transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee.”

The argument claims that the firm will gain benefit if it transfers to invest in Early Bird Coffee rather than in Cola Loca. The author cites the studies to reveal the trend about coffee and cola consumption, which have remained stable for the past 40 years. Based on the assumption that this trend will keep unchanged and the fact that the number of elders will increase in the next two decades, the author comes to his conclusion. This argument appeals to be plausible, but after a close inspection, there are some serious logic flaws.

Firstly, the author makes an assumption that the trend will remain unchanged in the next 20 years. However, the trend of the last 40 years is insufficient to support the assumption. It is very possible that the trend will fluctuate or even reverse in the future. For example, the supply and the price of the cola and coffee beans, as well as other business cost as a producer of cola and coffee drinks may fluctuate during a period. These factors may affect the price of the coffee and cola, which, in turn, may affect the cost of investments in coffee and cola companies. Without considering and ruling out other factors, the assumption is not justified.

Secondly, the author assumes that the increase in number of older adults will lead to the increase of the demand for coffee and the decline of the demand for cola. However, this assumption is groundless without taking into account the number of youngsters in the next 20 years. If there are more youngsters than elders, the demand for cola will increase rather than decline. In addition, some factors may influence people's habits. For instance, if a recent scientific research shows that coffee has a negative effect on people's health, especially on the elders' health, perhaps the elders will change to drink cola instead.

Finally, Even if the above two assumptions were warranted, the firm's choice to invest Early Bird Coffee is still questionable. A high demand for coffee does not ensure a higher sale of Early Bird Coffee. In fact, the firm provides no information about this brand, such as the market shares, and the competitiveness with other brands. Without a detailed market analysis, it is hasty for the firm to decide to invest in Early Bird Coffee.

To sum up, this argument is not compelling as it seems to be. To make the conclusion more tenable, the firm should provide more concrete and reliable evidence to substantiate the consumption trend will remain stable for the next two decades. Moreover, more detailed information need to be listed about the Early Bird Coffee to make this argument more convincing.