Argument48, 关于养老地选择,求指导
The following appeared in a magazinearticle about planning for retirement."Clearview should be a topchoice for anyone seeking a place to retire, because it has spectacular naturalbeauty and a consistent climate. Another advantage is that housing costs inClearview have fallen significantly during the past year, and taxes remainlower than those in neighboring towns. Moreover, Clearview's mayor promisesmany new programs to improve schools, streets, and public services. And best ofall, retirees in Clearview can also expect excellent health care as they growolder, since the number of physicians in the area is far greater than thenational average."
Write a response in which you discuss whatspecific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how theevidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
In this argumentabout planning for retirement, the arguer suggests that Clearview be a topchoice for anyone seeking a place to retire. To support the suggestion, thearguer provides evidence regarding geography advantages, cost on household, policyand health care condition of Clearview. The argument seems plausible at firstglance, but assumptions and evidence on which it is based are somewhatunwarranted.
Firstly,the arguer cites that housing costs in Clearview have fallen significantlyduring the past year. However, this doesn’t indicate the housing costsadvantages. Since there are lots of factors, such as market demand and policy,that influence the housing costs, it might increase in the future. On the otherhand, a significant housing costs falling might result from crime rateincrease, which is dangerous to old people.
Same logic canbe applied in tax evidence, we have no idea about how burden of taxation willvary in Clearview. Furthermore, we are not sure how low the tax is inClearview, it might be in fact higher than the average nationwide. Otherfactors might also influence retiree’s decision, food price, transportationcost, etc. The arguer failed to provide information about these factors.
Nextevidence the arguer provide is that major’s promises about new program toimprove schools, streets and public services. Towards this evidence, we cannotmake sure that major will necessarily keep his promises. Even though he willkeep his promises, the cost on improving public facility may spend long time,and cost on that might lead to high burden of taxation. What’s worse, theplanning in improving public facilities probably indicate that those facilitiescurrently available are in bad conditions.
Atthe end of the argument, the arguer states that retirees in Clearview canexpect excellent health care since the number of physicians in the area is fargreater than nationwide average. In fact, whether the health care can beconsider excellent depends on qualification of physicians, not number ofphysicians available. If the physicians in Clearview are those of badqualification, it will be hard for local resident to expect good health careservices.
Inshort, the conclusion of the argument is ungrounded since the assumptions andevidence support is unwarranted and vague. The arguer should analyze more aboutfactor affecting housing costs and taxation to convince people that Clearviewis capable of keeping those advantages. Also, further information in detailabout other factors affecting living cost, public facilities and qualificationof local physicians should be provided to emphasize advantages that Clearviewhold to be consider a top choice of retirees.
页:
[1]