[未归类] 欢迎互相拍砖 [复制链接]

victoriahui-831
UID：191036

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 173
注册时间: 2005-1-2
精华: 0
帖子: 1

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-3-20 22:24:04 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

68The following appeared in a memo from a budget planner for the City of Grandview.
'To avoid a budget deficit next year, the City of Grandview must eliminate its funding for the Grandview Symphony. Our citizens are well aware of the fact that while the Grandview Symphony Orchestra was struggling to succeed, our city government promised annual funding to help support its programs. Last year, however, private contributions to the Symphony increased by 200 percent, and attendance at the Symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. The Symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. Such developments indicate that the Symphony can now succeed without funding from city government and we can eliminate that expense from next year's budget. This action will surely prevent a budget deficit.'
------正文------
In the memo the budget planner for the City of grandview recommends  an elimination of its funding for the Grandview Symphony on the purpose of avoiding a budget deficit next year, which primarily based on the assumption that the Grandview Symphony will do a good job even without the financial aid from the government. However this assumption itself is unwarranted , which I will discuss separately below.
To begin with, the mere fact that the contributions to the Symphony increased by 200 percent could not lend any support to the assumption. We are not well informed the total amount of contributions to the Symphony last year, therefore whether the seemingly large amount of contributions will be substantive or marginal is not determined.  Consequently, one may conjure that the contributions last year only amount to a small quantity, and then it will be of little help this year. In fact, even when these contributions are considerably conductive, these donators might act the same as the government in the excuse of avoiding budge deficit next year.  In this situation, the Grandview symphony will face up a severely hard time.
  Another way as the author assumed is to raise its ticket prices, which would be sound, if it could be put into practice. However, the author failed to take into account of the fluctuation of the market. That is people would lose their interest in attending a live symphony, and prefer to enjoy it at home by TV or internet. Or the overall market for Symphony is gloomy as the influence of the stagnant economy. In both scenarios above, the profit of the Symphony may go an opposite way instead of increasing. Moreover, even if that change of economy is not going to occur, the author should think of the possibility that people will tend to be hesitating to pay for a ticket when it is raised, especially if the change is too large to be accepted.
Even if I concede that everything is going to get along well as the author supposed, that is the elimination of the Symphony fund will not be harmful to the survival of the Symphony, one could hardly get into the conclusion that this action is bound to prevent a budget deficit. It might be possible that something else might play an important role in the budget deficit. For instance, the efficiency of the government allocating money might waste a lot of fund that could be better used; the source of tax payers might decrease because of the dim economy. In this term, the author should put his attention to how to increase the prosperity of the city; therefore the aggregate tax will grow correspondingly. It is usually by this way that many of these kinds of problems are solved essentially.
In sum, in order to do a better job, the author should bat an idea around by reexamining the whole circumstance to get the blue print of the construction of the city, not merely vie to make ends meet by withdrawing his promise of annual funding.

回应
0

使用道具举报

haze1894
UID：185775

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 418
注册时间: 2004-11-12
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2005-3-21 15:36:19 |只看该作者

68The following appeared in a memo from a budget planner for the City of Grandview.
'To avoid a budget deficit next year, the City of Grandview must eliminate its funding for the Grandview Symphony. Our citizens are well aware of the fact that while the Grandview Symphony Orchestra was struggling to succeed, our city government promised annual funding to help support its programs. Last year, however, private contributions to the Symphony increased by 200 percent, and attendance at the Symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. The Symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. Such developments indicate that the Symphony can now succeed without funding from city government and we can eliminate that expense from next year's budget. This action will surely prevent a budget deficit.'
------正文------
In the memo the budget planner for the City of grandview recommends an elimination of its funding for the Grandview Symphony on the purpose of avoiding a budget deficit next year, which primarily based on the assumption that the Grandview Symphony will do a good job even without the financial aid from the government. However this assumption itself is unwarranted , which I will discuss separately below.

To begin with, the mere fact that the (private)contributions to the Symphony increased by 200 percent could not lend any support to the assumption. We are not well informed the total amount of (private) contributions to the Symphony last year, therefore whether the seemingly large amount of contributions will be substantive or marginal is not determined. Consequently, one may conjure that the contributions last year only amount to a small quantity, and then it will be of little help this year.(我觉得这里还可以再展开说明，因为只是单纯用语言来描述以前私人赞助的底数多少的问题力量不够） In fact, even when these contributions are considerably conductive, these donators might act the same as the government in the excuse of avoiding budge deficit next year.（这里要说私人赞助者的赞助时间是不确定的，没有任何数据表明私人赞助这会继续对乐团投资）In this situation, the Grandview symphony will face up a severely hard time.
Another way as the author assumed is to raise its ticket prices, which would be sound, if it could be put into practice. However, the author failed to take into account of the fluctuation of the market. （it is entirely possibe that)That is people would lose their interest in attending a live symphony, and prefer to enjoy it at home by(on) TV or internet. Or the overall market for Symphony is gloomy as the influence of the stagnant economy. In both scenarios above, the profit of the Symphony may go an opposite way instead of increasing. Moreover, even if that change of economy is not going to occur, the author should think of the possibility that people will tend to be hesitating（tend to hesitate) to pay for a ticket when it is raised, especially if the change is too large to be accepted.(对于来看表演的人数也可以置疑，也可能是外来人口来旅游，偶尔看看表演造成的）

Even if I concede that everything is going to get along well as the author supposed, that is the elimination of the Symphony fund will not be harmful to the survival of the Symphony, one could hardly get into the conclusion that this action is bound to prevent a budget deficit. It might be possible that something else might play an important role in the budget deficit. For instance, the efficiency of the government allocating money might waste a lot of fund that could be better used; the source of tax payers might decrease because of the dim economy. In this term, the author should put his attention to how to increase the prosperity of the city; therefore the aggregate tax will grow correspondingly. It is usually by this way that many of these kinds of problems are solved essentially. (这段后面一部分是不是展开的有点过了？没有必要提政府的注意力问题吧？）
In sum, in order to do a better job（这句话用在这不好，换个为人民服务之类的词）, the author should bat an idea around by reexamining the whole circumstance to get the blue print of the construction of the city, not merely vie to make ends meet by withdrawing his promise of annual funding.（这样的结尾我是第一次看到，好像是在给政府提建议？我觉得最后一段一般都是写作者需要提供更详细，更准确的信息）

使用道具举报

Growlywolf
UID：200584

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 523
注册时间: 2005-3-14
精华: 0
帖子: 0

板凳

发表于 2005-3-21 22:24:05 |只看该作者

In the memo the budget planner for the City of grandview recommends an elimination of its funding for the Grandview Symphony on the purpose of avoiding a budget deficit next year, which primarily based on the assumption that the Grandview Symphony will do a good job even without the financial aid from the government. However this assumption itself is unwarranted , which I will discuss separately below.

To begin with, the mere fact that the contributions to the Symphony increased by 200 percent could not lend any support to the assumption. We are not well informed the total amount of contributions to the Symphony last year, therefore whether the seemingly large amount of contributions will be substantive or marginal is not determined. Consequently, one may conjure that the contributions last year only amount to a small quantity, and then it will be of little help this year[这前面所有的contributions应该强调一下是private？因为argument里面实际上是把政府资助和私人资助对立起来的]. In fact, even when these contributions are considerably conductive[你是说这种不愿意捐献的思想会传染？感觉表达不是太明确], these donators might act the same as the government in the excuse of avoiding budge deficit next year. In this situation, the Grandview symphony will face up a severely hard time.[这个理由貌似有些牵强，还是前面那个even分句不明确的原因]

Another way as the author assumed is to raise its ticket prices, which would be sound, if it could be put into practice. However, the author failed to take into account of the fluctuation of the market[市场萧条不是必然的，加个probable之类的词是不是会更严谨]. That is people would lose their interest in attending a live symphony, and prefer to enjoy it at home by TV or internet. Or the overall market for Symphony is gloomy as the influence of the stagnant economy. In both scenarios above, the profit of the Symphony may go an opposite way instead of increasing. Moreover, even if that change of economy is not going to occur, the author should think of the possibility that people will tend to be hesitating to pay for a ticket when it is raised, especially if the change is too large to be accepted.

Even if I concede that everything is going to get along well as the author supposed, that is the elimination of the Symphony fund will not be harmful to the survival of the Symphony, one could hardly get into the conclusion that this action is bound to prevent a budget deficit. It might be possible that something else might play an important role in the budget deficit. For instance, the efficiency of the government allocating money might waste a lot of fund that could be better used; the source of tax payers might decrease because of the dim economy. In this term, the author should put his attention to how to increase the prosperity of the city; therefore the aggregate tax will grow correspondingly. It is usually by this way that many of these kinds of problems are solved essentially. [扯得太远了一点吧，^_^，只用说财政赤字不一定是由资助交响乐团引起的就行了啊]

In sum, in order to do a better job, the author should bat an idea around by reexamining the whole circumstance to get the blue print of the construction of the city, not merely vie to make ends meet by withdrawing his promise of annual funding.[就像楼上说的，这种结尾比较少见，一般都是说作者如果要提出更严谨的结论应该在哪些方面如何如何加强]

从来都没有什么救世主
也不靠神仙皇帝
要实现全人类的幸福
只有靠我们自己

使用道具举报