【Big Fish】3月2日Argument237-By rachelwang712

rachelwang712UID: 2757860

3.02 Argument No.237

The following appeared as part of an article in a local Beauville newspaper.

"According to a government report, last year the city of Dillton reduced its corporate tax rate by 15 percent; at the same time, it began offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities to any company that would relocate to Dillton. Within 18 months, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton, where they employ a total of 300 people. Therefore, the fastest way for Beauville to stimulate economic development and hence reduce unemployment is to provide tax incentives and other financial inducements that encourage private companies to relocate here."
-----------------------------------------------
提纲
1这两家公司不一定是被这些政策吸引过来，可能有其他原因
2受雇佣了300人，可能与此同时失业的人更多
3其他地方可能有更多的资源和人才，所以实际上同时期过来的公司减少，而且迁走增多，失业率在增大

------------------------------------------------

The article, though well-presented, is weak in reasoning. Its failure to clarify the true reasons why two companis moved to Dillton, to reflect the real picture of employment there by providing necessary information about people losing their jobs in this period of time and to compare Dillton and other similar regions undermines its cogency.

To begin with, there is no evidence showing that the two manufacturing companies are moving because of the economic incentive Dillton's government issued. It is probable that they are moving here for low transporting costs as Beauville is their largest market. That means whether Dillton's government provides financial inducements or not, they will move to Dillton. If that is the case, the arguer can not state that these measures actually are effective in encouraging companies to relocate there.

Furthermore, to have a knowledge of employment requires not only number of people employed but also of those who don't find a job. Chances are that even if 300 are getting employment, more are losing theirs because companies hiring them are closing their branches in Dillton for various possible reasons, namely, they can make greater profits if they set up a branch elsewhere or employ more talented staff in other regions. So that 300 find jobs does not necessarily mean that picture is less dim.

Finally, it is suggested that arguer draw comparison between Dillton and other places with similar situation to inspect whether Dillton's policies are more  encouraging or less. In fact, in case where several regions have reduced their tax rate to a more significant extent or command richer resources whether it is more profitable market or more experienced staff, Dillton may actually be luring much fewer companies despite all the efforts it makes. Therefore, statistics is needed of other regions' performance over the same period of time to support the arguer's point.

To sum up, the article is misleading in that it shows neither clear nor comprehensive situation. If the author aims to be more convincing, he will have to include more information about why companies are moving to Dillton why others are not, overall employment rate and how Dillton does compared with other similar places.

BobbieZZUID: 2756583

1# rachelwang712

The article, though well-presented, is weak in reasoning. Its failure to clarify the true reasons why two companis（companies） moved to Dillton, to reflect the real picture of employment there by providing necessary information about people losing their jobs in this period of time and to compare Dillton and other similar regions undermines its cogency.

To begin with, there is no evidence showing that the two manufacturing companies are moving(+there) because of the economic incentive (that) Dillton's government issued. It is probable that they are moving here for low transporting costs as Beauville is their largest market(two companies locate D have no relationship with B). That means whether Dillton's government provides financial inducements or not, they will move（此段三次出现move，可以同义替换一下） to Dillton. If that is the case, the arguer can not state that these measures actually are effective in encouraging companies to relocate(为什么要用relocate, just appeal them locate B city.题中没有出现过关于B的company搬家一事啊) there.

Furthermore, to have a（a删去） knowledge of employment requires not only number of people employed but also of those who don't find a job. Chances are that even if 300 are getting employment, more are losing theirs because companies hiring them are closing their branches in Dillton for various possible reasons, namely, they can make greater profits if they set up a branch elsewhere or employ more talented staff in other regions. So that 300 find jobs does not necessarily mean that picture is less dim.

Finally, it is suggested（suggest） that arguer draw(draws) comparison between Dillton and other places with similar situation to inspect whether Dillton's policies are more  encouraging or less. In fact, in case where several regions have reduced their tax rate to a more significant extent or command richer resources whether it is more profitable market or more experienced staff(这句话写的挺好), Dillton may actually be luring much fewer companies despite（by,despite就转折了） all the efforts it makes. Therefore, statistics is needed of other regions' performance over the same period of time to support the arguer's point.

To sum up, the article is misleading in that it shows neither clear nor comprehensive situation. If the author aims to be more convincing, he will have to include more information about why companies are moving to Dillton why others are not, overall employment rate and how Dillton does compared with other similar places.

谬误和逻辑都很好啊~一些小错误，书写的时候注意就好了~加油~
有个问题就是我有时候用would be, 有时候用will be. 搞不清楚，你要是看见了能在Q上帮我讲一下么~谢喽