大家啪啪我吧...郁闷的可以在我这找自信的...Argu25题...

xiong1210UID: 2781675

In this memo ,the author recommend the government of Hopewell to apply the same action as Ocean View did—— building a new golf course and resort hotel ——to improve Hopewell's economy. To support the recommendation, the author cite the fact that during past two years the tourism and tax revenue in Ocean View  has increased, and many new businesses have run there .However, close scrutiny of each evident reveals that the recommendation has several problem .
  To begin with, the 30% increase in tax revenue of OV is not necessarily due to the construction of the new golf course and the resort hotel. It is entirely possible that other business cause the development .Perhaps the government of OV has prompted some new policy, such as taking strong measures to develop the industry economy, or raising the tax rates all over the country. Without excluding other probability that may also cause the increase in tax revenue, the author can not establish a casual relationship between the construction and the 30% increase in tax revenue.
  Even if the higher tax are due to the tourism, no evidence shows that Hopewell might acquire the same or even more achievements compared to OV's.The author fails to consider the differents between two countries in many aspects,like the natural environment and the level of city development. Perhaps the advantage of OV is location,which own ecological sense and pleasant weather,so it has advantage to expand tourism .And Hopewell do not had.Thus, before making a complete comparison between the two city ,we can not hastily draw a conclusion that Hopewell will benefits by following OV's example.
  Finally, the arguer fails to consider other possible way that might also stimulate Hopewell's economy .No evidence that tourism is the only way to boost the tax is provided .Perhaps the fertile soil of Hopewell is suitable for the growing vegetable, the agriculture therefore might be the best way for Hopewell to increase tax revenue.
  In sum, according to the evidence that author cites above the recommendation seems to be unreasonable. To better support the recommendation the arguer need to account for us whether the construction is needed for the current of Hopewell. Also, the author should convince us that the construction might not be a waste of resource to Hopewell, or even pose a harm effect on it.