我写的Argument 233，大家给点点评吧：）

stanzyUID: 2629386

Argument 233
Even though a high percentage ofColeville City's businesses failed last year, we who live in Coleville Cityshould keep in mind the fact that the Coleville region has attracted a greatmany new businesses over the last three years. It is well known that newbusinesses are, on average, much more likely to fail than are long-establishedones, so the business failures should not be considered a sign of poor economichealth. Indeed, many analysts regard the presence of a significant number of newcompanies among a region's businesses as a sign of economic health. ThusColeville City appears to be in good, not poor, economic shape.

Thearguer concluded that Coleville City appear to be in good economic shape. Inorder to support his conclusion, he enumerated several examples, such as thecity attracted new businesses, to convince the readers that the city is in goodeconomic health. However, his evidence and conclusion have some fallacies aftera careful scrutinizing.

Firstof all, the arguer evaluate the economic situation of Coleville City by a wrongcriteria. Can new businesses can really show if a city is in good healthyeconomy? The arguer did not mention what these new businesses are, so we canassume that they may be some small shops selling papers and pens; or they mayalso be some grocery stores. So it might be presumptuous to say that newbusiness is the sign of good economy.

Thearguer tried to strengthen his argument by adding “ new businesses are , onaverage, much more likely to fail than are long-established ones.” However,this premise may not be true. The arguer failed to provide any study or surveyto show that new businesses are more easily to fail. He couldn’t even provideany information about the new business in the Coleville City either; so hisconclusion is doubtable as well.

Finally,the suggestions from the so-called analysts are probably invalid. The arguerdid not say what these analysts are, nor did he show how these analysts gotthese conclusion. Before the arguer cited the words from the analysts, he mustthink if these analysts are arbitors in the economic field or not. If they arejust some amateur who work in small companies, then their suggestions might notbe true. Surely, even if they are arbitors in thir field, they’ll still have toevaluate the economic situation in Coleville City to get the final conclusion.

In summary, the argument is weak in the above aspects.In order to make the argument more convincing, the arguer should gather moreinformation about the Coleville City, and evaluate how much profit the smallbusinesses have brought to the city. Otherwise, the argument will seem tooopinionated.

这篇不在30个难Argument 之列，可是我在用AWP练习的时候，居然觉得它非常的难，以至于没有在30分钟内完成。我第一次采写了279个字啊！哭.............后来第二天早晨有灵感了，又从写了一遍。

基本思路就是：１．新的企业的成功不一定说明经济形势好，也许新企业只是一些小商店，起不了太大作用。
２．新的企业也不一定就那么容易倒闭。所以它们倒闭与否不能说明城市的经济情况。
３．专家的结论不可靠。谁知道那些所谓的分析家是不是权威。即使是，那也必须特定调查ＣＣ城市自身的情况。

windLeeUID: 2691719

　我是来围观的. 学习中.

除了支持你的观点，我补充和增加一点点自己的拙见

首先他没有提出，这个很高的失败率里面，新企业是多少，成熟企业又有多少。

然后，这个新企业多仅仅是他们当地居住者的主观感受而已，连切实的数据都没有。所以，他的论点的数据基础都值得质疑。并且在此基础上，虽然当地企业大量倒闭或许不说明当地经济差，但是，新企业多同样也不能得到当地经济好的结论(最后一句) 　这既不是一个不差就好的概念，也不是一个由单一的新企业数量因素能决定的问题（你的最后一点）

接下来，经济健康度和经济型不是一个概念，并不是经济健康，其shape就好。当地的企业如新老比例等，如他自己所述，没准就是失调的

其它，一个城市如果养不活新兴企业是很有问题的，却被一句话带过了。这不能说明和该城市的经济情况无关，相反的，更让人怀疑这和经济情况脱不了关系，况且，时间上，引入新企业是过去三年的事，企业垮台是去年一年的事，更不能得到，企业大规模倒闭和经济问题没关系的结论。


＝－＝＝＝＝＝＝
我想到什么就说了，逻辑什么可能乱翻翻的.. 　互相完善，互相完善..