argument157

zylpascalUID: 2710054

TOPIC: ARGUMENT157 - The following is a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
"As a local merchant, I wish to support the development of a ski resort in the state park north of our township. Along with many other merchants who favor the proposal by Ski the Slopes, Incorporated, I would, of course, experience a growth in my business. But I also know how much more prosperous, not to mention lively and interesting, our community would be if tourism increased. Since the main opposition comes from a few environmentalists* who do not even live in this community, I see no reason to give in to their views. The First National Bank has finally researched the project and agreed to fund it. As a result, I see no reason to delay development of the resort."
*Environmentalists are people who advocate the preservation of the natural environment.
WORDS: 404          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010-3-22 11:36:48



The arguer's assertion
that this resort projection of TSki the Slopes should be elaborated even encountering the disapproval voice from some environmentalists . While , in my view, this proposal should not be too hasty, it is worthy of more further consideration regarding as many factors as possible, of which the environmental protection is the only one reason.

What the arguer commits the first illogical flaws is that the particular backgrounds of the merchants were presented. Thus, we can infer that maybe some of the merchants were only to give their approval basing on their own profits speculation motives. For example, some merchants merely pay attentions to the revenue ability of this project and would not concern the author's own benefits. No matter how many they are, the most important thing is overlooked by the arguer is that which type of assistance he would really obtain from these businessmen. Furthermore, in the absence of the demographic statistics of the arguer's town population and the transportation conditions around the town, it is doubtful that this project would be surely profitable when exerted in this town. If the people of the community there are almost elders who do not expect a disturbance form the outside, then this recommendation
seems to be thwarted. If the people are too scarce there, then what the tourism( if there are "many") get the
accommodation? If the transportation condition there is too bad and inconvenienced, then the tourists would expense more time and money on the transportation, which apparently add the cost in total.

The second serious flaws in the arguer's discoursing is
that he/she does not present the backgrounds of the environmentalists. If the environmentalists comprise of some statesmen or politicians who is chiefly in charge of the tourism affairs, then we can image that this proposal about building a Ski resort may not be easily pass through the government census. For example, if the terrain features of the arguer's town is apt to occur landslides or earthquakes , then this project would be probably vetoed by the local official of the environmental department.

What's more, the number and condition of the fund from the First national Bank
is not given as well , thus to evaluate the effects this fund could bring is difficult. Maybe the fund is not enough to support this project or maybe the loan condition is too rigid that the profits(if exists) just cannot counterbalance the
debt.

  
In conclusion, due to the above unreasonable faults in the argument, it is not advisable for the arguer to adopt this Ski resort project since the revenue ability of it dose not seen clearly. If some details such as , the long-term plan
of this project , the geographic situation of this town,
the opponents' constitution and lastly the debt qualification of the Bank fund were listed, then this recommendation deserves a reevaluation.

shohoku11wrjUID: 2731579