argument17 欢迎拍砖

amanda2005UID：2120493

17

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."


The argument seems to be reasonable and convincing at a first glance for the arguer’s analysis in the three aspects of costs, service and residents’ feedback. The final choice is still EZ for the reasons of its service of twice collections per week which is only paid 40% more than ABC’s, additional trucks of EZ available and citizens’ satisfaction with EZ based on a survey. However, the conclusion of the argument is misleading for there are several fallacies in it.

In the first place, the arguer overlooks the necessity of twice collections of garbage for the town and only focuses on one more time of service. How about the surroundings of Walnut Grove's town? If most citizens have a good awareness to keep the town clean and seldom litter in public places, or even concern about the recycling of materials in the trash, it will be wasteful to dispose the garbage twice per week. Thus the amount of trash in the town in one week and the degree to impact the town’s environment must be taken into account to decide the frequency of disposal.

In the second place, the arguer does not provide further statement about the additional trucks’ advantages for trash collection. It is true that truck is an important tool for such a job. Yet there is no information about the inefficiency due to lack of trucks during past ten years. Maybe the additional trucks are ready to serve one more time a week for Walnut Grove's town or the EZ has more customers to serve. Thereby EZ imposes the costs of purchasing these trucks to charges of service to the customers. Meanwhile, we are not sure whether those trucks are new or second-handed. As the trucks will run around the whole town for trash, they are bound to pollute the air. Thus the number of trucks should be not presented to support EZ is superior.

In the third place, the survey conducted last year can not be convincing to indicate that EZ will be more satisfied than ABC in future days. The citizens will probably complain about the higher fee charged by EZ associated with their increased taxes. What’s more, they never know about the ABC’s performance so that there is no comparison to judge which is better. At the same time , there is another possibility that as the year before is the last year of the contract with Walnut Grove's town, under the threat of new competitor, EZ paid more attention to the performance. Lack of survey in other nine years of service, we can not be hasty to show the good evaluation to EZ.

To sum up, the town council has considered much to choose the trash collection company for the town’s sanitary. However, it is essential to make further investigations about what is the true requirement for the collection’s frequency, the additional trucks’ benefits to the disposal job, ABC’s former or existing  customers’ feedback and so on. Otherwise, the town will lose a more deserved supplier of service.

childrenqUID：2109575

The argument seems to be reasonable and convincing at a first glance for the arguer’s analysis in the three aspects of costs, service and residents’ feedback. The final choice suggestion is still EZ for the reasons of its service of twice collections per week which is only paid 40% more than ABC’s, additional trucks of EZ available and citizens’ satisfaction with EZ based on a survey. However, the conclusion of the argument is misleading for there are去掉 several fallacies in it去掉.

In the first place, the arguer overlooks the necessity of twice collections of garbage for the town and only focuses on one more time of service. How aboutare the surroundings of Walnut Grove's town去掉 WG本来就是town的名字? If most citizens have a good awareness to keep of keeping好点吧 the town clean and seldom litter in public places, or even concern about the recycling of materials in the trash, it will be wasteful to dispose the garbage twice per week. Thus, the amount of trash in the town in one week and the degree to impact the town’s environment must be taken into account to decide the frequency of disposal.

In the second place, the arguer does not provide further statement about the additional trucks’ advantages for trash collection. It is true that truck is an important tool for such a job. Yet there is no information about the inefficiency due to lack of trucks during past ten years. Maybe the additional trucks are ready to serve one more time a week for Walnut Grove's town or the EZ has more customers to serve. Thereby EZ imposes the costs of purchasing these trucks to charges of service to the customerson the customers就行了. Meanwhile, we are not sure whether those trucks are new or second-handed. 一手二手没有关系吧 As the trucks will run around the whole town for trash, they are bound to pollute the air. Thus the number of trucks should be not presented tocan not就行了 support that EZ is superior.

In the third place, the survey conducted last year can not be convincing to indicateprove that EZ will be more satisfied than ABC in future days.the survey conducted last year can not prove that EZ will be better than ABC in the future The citizens will probably complain about the higher fee charged by EZ associated with their increased taxes. What’s more, they never know about the ABC’s performance so that there is no comparison to judge which is better. At the same time, there is another possibility that as the year before is the last year of the contract with Walnut Grove's town, under the threat of new competitor, EZ paid more attention to the performance. Lack of survey in other nine years of service, we can not be it is too hasty to show recognize the good evaluation to of EZ.

To sum up, the town council has considered much to choose the trash collection company for the town’s sanitary. However, it is essential to make further investigations about what is the true requirement for the collection’s frequency, the additional trucks’ benefits to the disposal job, ABC’s former or existing customers’ feedback and so on. Otherwise, the town will lose a more deserved good supplier of service.

amanda2005UID：2120493

其实我是想说二手车比较破，更容易污染空气，这里没有些清楚

childrenqUID：2109575

比较破就会更污染空气吗? 这个没有必然联系的, 不是旧车污染就大

Originally posted by amanda2005 at 2005-8-25 13:13
其实我是想说二手车比较破，更容易污染空气，这里没有些清楚

xjtuchenUID：2106678

这篇写的太好了 学习