ARGUMENT42 求拍！

grepinleUID: 2762671

ARGUMENT42 - The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra.
"In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea's main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign."
     The author suggest that Paraterra government should preserve the natural environment of their country by promoting ecotourism as the Bellegea government did and hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant. To support this proposal  the author note that this year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea main airport doubled and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. However, the author's proposal rests on certain doubtful assumption that render it unconvincing as it stands.
     First, the author provide no evidence to support that the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea main airport doubled and per capita income increased by ten present dues to the Bellegea government promote ecotourisem. There might be many other factors cause  the foreign visitors come to Bellegea. Perhaps the foreign visitors come for ecotourism just count for a small portion of the number of the arrived visitors. Without ruling other possible reasons for the increased number of visitors and per capita income, the author can not convince me that the Bellegea government promote ecotourism was the main reason. Lacking such evidence it is entirely possible that the strong number of visitors just was a casual circumstance, these visitors actually have little interest in ectourism.
    secondly, even if the foreign visitors were interested in ecotourism and brought increased income for Bellegea, the author can not confidently conclude that the similar case will happen to Paraterra.There might be many differences between Bellegea and Paraterra. The author does not offer us more information about the P's environment and other conditions, perhaps the environment and other conditions of Paraterra are not suit for the government promote ecotourism.
    Thirdly, even if the Paraterra government should promote ecotourism the author provide no evidence to support that Paraterra government should also hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant. The author does not offer any information about the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office, perhaps his or her capacity was not suit for a advertising campaign. The author also ignore that there might be other people would do it better than the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office.
    In sum, the proposal is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To support it the author must provide clear evidence that the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea main airport doubled and per capita income increased by ten present was attributed to the Bellegea government promote ecotourisem, and the ecotourism will be also applied to Paraterra. Additionally, I need to know whether the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office is the best candidate.