argument17 FlY AW 作文组

kckUID: 2214868

TOPIC: ARGUMENT17 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."
WORDS: 352          TIME: 0:43:41          DATE: 2006-5-24
提纲:
1.作者假设每周收集2次垃圾是必要的.也许一周一次就够了.因此不能说明多出500是否必要
2.作者暗示EC新买卡车会更好服务,,但是没有证据表明如次.也许新车不是为W服务的,也许原来车就够了,新增加卡车很难提升服务.
3.调查可能不够可信.也许样本不够代表所有,也许被调查者选择满意是因为习惯了服务.
   The author recommendate that Walnut Grove's town council should continue using EZ Disposal,though EZ Disposal recently raised its fee by 25%. To support this ,the author points out that EZ collects trash twice a week ,which is doule of the ABC Waste's rate.The author also points out the EZ has orderd additional trucks. And the author cited a survey ,which shows  that most citizens  were satisfied with EZ's performance ,to conclude that EZ provides exeptional service. However,the author 's recommendation is unconvincing in several aspects.
  Fistly,the author simplely assumes that higher collection rate is neccesary for the town.Nevertheless,no evidence is provided to show that Walnu Grove need their trash to be collected twice a week.Perhaps colletct once per week is enough to satisfy the citizens' needs.Without relavent evidences,the author cannot convince me that Walnut Grove's concil should pay another 500$ per month for one more trash collection every week.
Secondly,the author implicits that EZ could provide better service for it has recently orderd  additional trucks.However, this is unconvicing.For it is quite possible that these new trucks are planed to be used anywhere else.Or perhaps the trucks that are now used to collect  Walnut Grove's trash is enough and the increase of trucks won't bring any better service.Then the author's conclusion is unreliable if no more evidence could be provided.
Thirdly, the survey that cited in the argument may not be statistical reliable.The argument fails to give out details to show that the anticipants of the survey are representative of all local people.It is entirely possible that those who were satisfied with EZ's performence are more likely to respond the survey.Moreover ,it is also possible that the reason for most respondents' satisfaction is only because they have been used to EZ's service .Then the author cannot justify that choosing EZ again would be better choice for Walnut Grove's people.
  In sum,the author's recommendation is not reliable for the above reasons.To strenthen the recommendation,the author must provide more lear evidence to show that to pay for another 500$ is worthy for Walnut Grove and EZ Disposal does could provide better service than ABC waste.