argument17 collect trash[自由女神小组第14次作业]

hedou992UID: 2199425

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: 484         TIME: 上午 80mins          DATE: 2007-2-26
提纲：
1.Walnut Grove's更换收垃圾的公司有没有其他原因，不一定是价格原因。
2.Walnut Grove's的资金问题（是不是由于缺少资金不得已），EZ价格上升有合理原因吗？
3.有着较低价格的ABC公司服务上可能完全能满足我们的要求。

This plausible argument makes a conclusion that Walnut Grove(WG) should continue using EZ to collect trash rather than turn to ABC Waste, because EZ's service is more perfect and therefore it deserves the higher price. However, after scrutinizing these evidences and the reasoning of the author, this argument is far from perfect. The author should think it again more carefully before he draw the conclusion.

First of all, the author fails to provide the evidence to proof the real cause of Walnut Grove's switching from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste. From the argument it seems that it is only because the price's rise lead to WG's switching. Is it true? Is there any other reasons? Perhaps EZ Disposal is a traditional company who deal the trash only by burying them. In another hand, ABC Waste is a company who introduced modern machines to dispose the trash in a environmental measure and even better a good portion of the trash can be recycle. It is this recycle way that make the ABC’s price is lower than EZ’s. If this is true, we can believe that the WG town council decision is right in no doubt.

Secondly, even if the way of dispose the trash is similar between these two companies, the author fails to provide details about the WG’s finance and why EZ raise their price. First, we can not rule out the situation that WG lacks of finance, so that the price is the first factor in their selecting company and they have to select a lower price company to collect their trash no matter how worse the service is. Second, why EZ raise their price? There is no evidence prove that their service is better than before, and the author only compare these two company rather than compare itself to the last year’s situation. Perhaps there is no difference between now and last year of the EZ’s service. Thus WG can not accept the EZ’s raising price unreasonable.

Finally, we can not conclude that the ABC’s service can not satisfy the WG’s requirement from the argument. Perhaps WG is a small town and have a small population, so there is no necessary to collect trash twice a week by spend another $500. Moreover a fleet of 20 trucks or additional trucks only demonstrate the company’s capacity, and it does not indicate a better service to WG which is more emphasized. In addition, the author only gives a survey about last year’s service. Will the respondents be satisfied when they know the price raising? Perhaps 80% will not satisfy.

In sum, to strengthen the argument the author should provide more details about why the WG cares more about the price, and what differences are there between EZ and ABC. To better evaluate the argument I have to know the population of the WG town and what the people’s opinions about the EZ raising price.

nkmatchUID: 2242521

时间关系只看了两段。
不过第一段里说abc价格低因为可能recycling?

这个成本肯定比填埋要贵很多。lz可以换一下。
语言挺不错的，加油！