shelodor的习作贴--Argument
本帖最后由 Shelodor 于 2012-8-28 21:50 编辑argument 37
The following appeared in a recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis.
"Ten years ago, as part of a comprehensive urban renewal, the city of Transopolis adapted for industrial use a large area of severely substandard housing near the freeway. Subsequently, several factories were constructed there, crime rates in the area declined, and property tax revenues for the entire city increased. To further revitalize the city, we should now take similar action in a declining residential area on the opposite side of the city. Since some houses and apartments in existing nearby neighborhoods are currently unoccupied, alternate housing for those displaced by this action will be readily available."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The recommendation from planning department of Transopolis illustrates a similar measure taken ten years ago to revitalize the economy of the city. The author tries to convince us by the significant contributions the policy made back to ten years ago, which suffers from several major mistakes. I will further my analysis to the recommendation on its three major defects.
To begin with, the succession of accomplishments government made ten years ago may not all due to the use and construction of factories. The author suggested in the recommendation that the industrial use of substandard housing was only a part of comprehensive urban renewal. Although several factories were built and crime rates were declined after industrialization of that area, it might was a result of other major programs, which is not recognized or illustrated here. It is quite probable that the crime rate declination is due to sufficient job supply in the area and optimization of social welfare. Along with it, the tax revenue would certainly augmented since there are more taxpayers in the city. The industrialization does not have a certain casual relationship with the following statements, which makes the evidence ungrounded.
Even if the survey and conclusion of urban renewal in the area is valid, it still cannot apply to nowadays revitalization of the city. A lot of conditions are distinct from that of ten years ago. The author explicates that the reason why changing those housing into factories was those houses were severely substandard and near highway, which did not appropriate for people living in. To change those into industry uses offered the area an opportunity to revitalize. But in the area now is going to be renewed, it is located faraway from freeway and do not have houses that are seriously damaged or overused. It is a residential area that does not certainly can be used as factories. With no sufficient supporting details, the author cannot transplant the method to a different situation.
Moreover, the comprehensive status and problems of Transopolis can be quite diversified during ten years. In the recommendation, it is suggested that the city might lack of industrial areas and sufficient jobs ten years ago, which caused a labor surplus. While with ten years development, that probably is not the major issue for Transopolis government. Instead, we can see from the argument that the residents of the area are declining. It indicates Transopolis might face a dilemma of labor shortage and economical developing downturn. There is no use to carry out a measurement do not fit the current situation.
To sum up, the author does not recognize the vital issues of development in Transopolis, which make the recommendation falls into a fallacy. More researches have to be undertake in order to resolve new coming challenges.
老大你知道succession什么意思不？
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed。要你谈evidence。看范文
页:
[1]