argument73 ，请指教!!!谢谢

hmwstanleyUID：2617486

ARGUMENT73 - The following appeared in a memo from a manager of a car dealership.
"Ten years ago, long-term car leasing became available in our country of Mohilia as an alternative to outright car ownership, and leasing has steadily risen in popularity. For each of the last five years, the number of people leasing new cars has surpassed the number buying new cars. The average age of cars driven in Mohilia is six years; hence, if new car leases again outnumber purchases this year, it is likely that the majority of drivers will be driving leased, not individually owned, cars. Therefore, we should change the focus of our business from selling cars to leasing them."

以下是我写的（大侠指教，马上要考了！！！，欢迎留言！！！）

In this argument , the author concludes that reversing the focus
from selling cars to leasing them will automatically render us a profitable business. To substantiate the conclusion, the author provides the population increase in buying leasing cars for every last five years. Additionally, the author points out that the average cars driven in Mohilia is six years. Then, he concludes the prosperity of leasing cars in the next year. The argument is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions in several respects.

Firstly, one flaw weakens the argument is that the author gratuitously shifted from ''the number of people leasing new cars'' in the evidence to the sales number of leasing new cars in the conclusion. However, the latter terms is highly possible refers to a broacher extension. Thus, the real number between sales in leasing new cars and buying new cars are unknown. It is entirely possible that one person may buy 2 or more cars but leasing only one car annually. Hence, unless the real statistic has been scrutinized and eliminated , we are not convinced by the author' conclusion.

Moreover, the argument goes on to cite a significantly enhance on profit the strategy but don not offer any detail message about the revenue and price indicates no effective persuasive points on us. In all likelihood, even the reasing cars population are higher than the buying new cars ,it achieves less profit in the overall transaction.

Even assuming a integral higher profits in leasing new cars, the ''level cars age is six'' and seemly popular leasing in last five years is vague. The author pays no heed to a false analogy that the buying leasing new cars passion may changed over the next year. People in Mohilia may interested in buying new cars rather than leasing cars in the next year. Therefore, the
argument may become dramatically fluctuate as time goes by.

Anther logical error the author made is that he falsely equates that we can only take a either-or choice. However, the author fails to taking account
the possibility adjusting leasing as well as buying new cars may achieve the same or even better results. Moreover, we can buy second-hand cars in addition. In any cases, the author provides no justification for the mutually exclusive choice imposed on the rear.

In summery, the argument is lack of cogent logical and unsubstantiated as it stands. To buttress the conclusion, the author would have to rule out more evidence. Such evidence might include the following: (1)the number of leasing new cars are higher than the buying new cars; (2) every leasing merchandizes profitable rather than buying; (3) the volume is retain increasing in the several futher years.