求拍求拍~~~~~拍死我好了！argue2~有拍必回~

zhaohanUID: 2595904

2The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
2010-1-29 10：10
提纲：
1.
The argument is based on an assumption that the two places are comparable.
2
Furthermore, the author fails to rule out other factors that may influence the property values in Brookbille.
3
The arguer fails to consider the negative effects of applying the same methods.
4.
Feasibility
正文：
In the argument, the homeowner recommends that in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Arces, all the homeowners should adopt their own set of restrictions on landscape and housepainting. Well-represent and logical reasoning though at first sight, the argument can hardly stand up to any scrutiny for its apparent flows:

First and foremost, the argument is based on an assumption that the two places are comparable. However, we are not informed any information about Brookbille and it is entirely possible that there are many differences between Brookbille and Deerhaven Arces. For example, the location is a vital factor that influences the property value. The better the location of Brookville is, the better the price. Whether other factors like environment, the public serve, the transportation can also influence the value of their houses are comparable is open to doubt. Unless provide evidence that both two places are same –at least similar-at every aspects, the arguer cannot convinced us that the restrictions are fit for houses in Deerhaven Arces,either.

Even assumes that the two places are comparable, the inference that scrutiny the effective methods in the past can also be effective in the future rest on the assumption that all conditions remained unchanged during the last seven years. But the assessment to the value of property is probable changed a lot during the last period. For instance, perhaps nowadays more and more people tend to prefer the free-style houses, that is, have no restrictions on landscaping and housepainting, just maintain the original verities of houses. If so, the restriction will suffer from the dissatisfaction of homeowners.

Furthermore, the author fail to consider the negative effects after apply the restriction. Take on for instance, the application of the restrictions will increase the costs and if the costs cannot attractive enough profits to balance, it will surely be regarded as a fail plan.

Moreover, the arguer overlooks the feasibility of the plan. Perhaps not all the residents are willing to accept the change and the restriction that refer the modification of the location and environment which can easily be against.

To sum up, the recommendation is suffered from ill-logical reasons and unreliable assumptions. To strengthen the argument, the author has to provide the evidence that the circumstance of Brookbille and Deerhaven Arces is similar as well as all the factors that may influence the property value can remain unchanged in the future. Besides, the writer is supposed to demonstrate that the restriction can be free from all the negative effects and proved to be feasible. Only after all these possibilities are ruled out can we conclude that the restriction will surely raise the property value in Deerhaven Arces.