Argument151 求拍~谢谢，有拍必回

chaconneUID: 2745622

151The following is a letter to the editor of the Atticus City newspaper.

"Former Mayor Durant owes an apology to the city of Atticus. Both the damage to the River Bridge, which connects Atticus to Hartley, and the traffic problems we have long experienced on the bridge were actually caused 20 years ago by Durant. After all, he is the one who approved the construction of the bridge. If he had approved a wider and better-designed bridge, on which approximately the same amount of public money would have been spent, none of the damage or problems would have occurred. Instead, the River Bridge has deteriorated far more rapidly over the past 20 years than has the much longer Derby Bridge up the river. Even though the winters have been severe in the past several years, this is no excuse for the negligence and wastefulness of Durant."

By presenting both the damage to the River Bridge and the traffic problems people from Atticus have long experienced on the bridge, the arguer concludes that it is the Mayor Durant who should be blamed for this. However, I found Mayor Durant may be treated unjustly and I have my reasons as follows.

To begin with, Mayor Durant may have made the best choice for Atticus 20 years ago. Firstly, as we know, unlike today when computers and other high technologies are heavily used in the design phase of a bridge, the design theories and technological measures might not be so developed at that time that the River Bridge was considered well-designed 20-years ago. Secondly, the heavy traffic may not be expected by the Mayor. The traffic might be smooth between Atticus and Hartley 20 years ago and the width of the bridge was enough for the traffic flow between the two cities. However, after the bridge was built, the distance between the two cities was shorted, so that the commercial exchange between the two cities was sharply increased, which might lead to fast development of Atticus. Therefore, traffic on the bridge became more and more heavy and thus a lot of damage was made because of the traffic. In short, the River Bridge might be well-design and had a great influence on the economy of Atticus, to judge the damage and heavy traffic despite the benefits it brought in is unfair.

Even if we concede that the River Bridge could be built wider and better, there’s no evidence the wider bridge could be well-designed and built under approximately the same amount of public money. The fiscal of Atticus might be on a tight budget for it was at the crucial developing time and a lot of common facilities were under construction and public services were constantly provided. If a wider and better bridge plan of the River Bridge was proved, more money and manpower might be needed to ensure the quality of the River Bridge. Thereby, a wider and better plan of the River Bridge might not be approved at the same amount of public money.

Further, the less deteriorated bridge, Derby Bridge, might not even be comparable to River Bridge. As it is presented in the argument, Derby Bridge was built up the river. The situations there might be a myriad of differences against River Bridge, such as the water flow, the climate, the traffic, etc. If the impact of water flow is less, the climate is better for the condition of a bridge and the traffic is no so heavy, there is no doubt that Derby Bridge has suffered less during the past 20 years. Accordingly, Derby Bridge should not be used to compare to the condition of River Bridge.

In general, the design and construction of River Bridge may be the best choice which was chose by Mayor Durant 20 years ago. It is unfair to judge the mayor’s decision as a fault by the damage to the bridge and heavy traffic which people have experienced long.