【10G10Hawk】小组7月30日任务——Argument237

hwslqcUID: 2861597

TOPIC: ARGUMENT237 - 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."
WORDS: 512          TIME: 00:39:49          DATE: 2010-7-30 15:10:37

The notion that Beauville should provide tax incentives and other financial inducements to attract private companies seems to be sound and convincing. After all, In Dillton, within 18 months after it began offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton. However, close scrutiny reveals that none of these evidence lend credible support to stimulate economic development and reduce unemployment in Beauville.

First of all, the mid-conclusion that the revolution leads to the quicker development and the decline of unemployment in Dillton is doubtable. As the author does not provide any information about the economic environment in Dillton, we can not know how many manufacturing companies move into Dillton in average 18 months before the revolution. Chances are that far more than 2 manufacturing companies move into Dillton and the revolution actually decreased the rate. And even if the number of manufacturing companies moved into Dillton increased, what about other companies? Maybe this revolution cased many other companies except manufacturing companies to leave Dillton. Furthermore, we have no ideas about the size of Dillton, if it is a big cite like New York, these two companies can do little about the economic development and the rate of unemployment. Not mentioned that the revolution and movement of the manufacturing company can show little more than they happened sequently. The causal relationship between the revolution and the movement of manufacturing company does not be proved. May be they just happened at same time by chance. Without ruling out all the possibilities I mentioned above, the author cannot get the conclusion that Dillton is benefit from such revolution.

Granted Dillton stimulate the economic development and reduce unemployment, which is an unwarranted assumption of course, the author cannot deduce the conclusion that it will be the same in Beauville either. Such groundless assumption is based on the premise that Beauville and Dillton are almost the same. However, there is no convincing evidence or even logical discursion to support such opinion. If Beauville is a big city that already have enough manufacturing factories while Dillton is developing city in need of manufacturing companies; or if Beeville’s corporate tax is far less than that in Dillton; or if Beauville is not convenient in geography aspect for the transportation of manufacturing companies, all these will cause fundamental difference between Beauville and Dillton and lead to significant different result after the same revolution. So without enough information and data about the size, culture, geography environment, economic laws and something like that in Beauville and Dillton, the premise is not ensured and will undermine the author's conclusion.

Besides, the author gets the conclusion that it is the fastest way without any comparison with any other way and overlooks all the disadvantages of his recommendations, which will mislead the readers. How can we know whether it is the fastest based on such limited and vague data? Even if it is the fastest way, if it will cause other problem, like environment pollution, more serious than simulating economic development, such recommendation should not be accepted.

To sum up, this recommendation may benefit Beeville’s economical grow and reduce the rat of unemployed. However, before claim such recommendation, persuasive, practical and professional research and survey should be taken，such as the reason why those 2 companies moved into Dillton, the same and difference between Dillton and Beauville, or other possible ways to stimulate economic development and reduce unemployment in Beauville.

hwslqcUID: 2861597

TOPIC: ARGUMENT237 - 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."
WORDS: 404          TIME: 00:40:59          DATE: 2010-7-30 15:01:49




In this newspaper, the author of the argument conclude that in order to stimulate economic development and reduce unemployment, Beauville should provide tax incentives and various financial inducements as well as encouage(encourage) private companies to relocate here. To support this argument, the author cites a government report showing the city of Dillton has adopted a series of economical policies such as tax cut and offering relocation grants and has achieved quite satisfying results: two manufacturing copaines(companies) moved to Dillton and employed some 3000(真是300) people. However, this argument suffers from several critical logical flaws.

To begin with, the author of the argument unfairly assumes that those economic policies adopted by the Dillton government is(are) attributable to the relocation of the two manufacturing companies. Perhaps the two companies are in need of many workers, and the average salary of the workers in Dillton is quite low, therefore the two companies moved in to save the costs. Moreover, since Dillton only introduced the economic policies last year while the two companies moved in Dillton within 18 months. It is entirely possible that the relocation of the two companies happened before Dillton launched its economic policies. If so, the argument would be severely underminded.(undermined)

Secondly, the author provides no evidence that the relocation of the two manufacturing companies indeed stimulate the economic development. Lacking such evidences, it is also possible that the economic development in Dillton has been checked despite the increasing employment.(这个攻击点太单薄了。没例子，没论述。与其蜻蜓点水的都说还不如就某一个展开攻击，在末尾提及另外的攻击点。)

Thirdly, the author fails to consider the difference between Dillton and Beauville that might help to bring about a different result for Beauville if Beauville adopt those economic proposals. Perhaps offering the relocation grants will be a huge burden for Beauville which, on the contrary, serves to be detrimental to economic development.（同上）


＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝


This argument presented several phenomena, but the author fails to convince readers the causal and effect relationship between them. Why two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton (D) is caused by the change policies in the tax rate? Why the same thing will happen in the other place Beauville (B) without considering the differences between B and D? And why are tax incentives the fastest way for stimulating economic development and reduce unemployment in B without analyzing other methods? The argument suffers from several logical flaws as below:
The author present the fact that two manufacturing companies moved to D after new tax and other financial inducements began putting into force, but he/she fails to establish the cause and effect relationship between them. 18 months seems not an immediate effect of the new regulations, which may add my confusions for the question that what is the true reason for the two companies moved to D. Perhaps, D serves good quality of raw materials for the two companies. Perhaps, D is close to a newly developed market for the two companies. Or perhaps, D has numerous labors who can accept working with low salaries. The argument lack the directing evidence to prove that the two companies moved into D is because of the new regulations.(写的太好，太流畅了。找不到批斗的地方。)

Even assuming D benefit from the claimed regulations in the argument, it is too hasty conclude that B will benefit from the similar policies as D. The author has not provided any information about B's economy. Perhaps B does not have extra space for new companies now. It can't help anything if the government lowers the corporate tax rate. Perhaps B has a special culture that rejects companies from outer world（可能性那么多，没必要举这种太特殊的吧。有点欲加之罪的感觉，你说呢？）. Or perhaps, the corporate tax rate is very low in B now. It will result in unbearable burdens if the government lowers the tax rate.
Also, it is headlong for the author to conclude that the elaborated way（为什么用elaborated？详尽说明的？）
is the fastest way to stimulate economics. The author hasn't analyzed what is the advantage for the economic development. Perhaps, B has a lot of undeveloped tourism resources. The best way would be trying to attract companies to invest to tourism. Perhaps, B has many mineral lodes that B had better think way to utilize the lobes. Or perhaps, the fastest way to stimulate B’s economics is export.
All in all, the author’s conclusion that if B uses the similar economic incentives as D, the unemployment will be reduced is untenable. To substantiate his/her standpoint, the follow things need to be down: (1) the cause and effect relationship between new policies and the occurrence of two moving in companies in D needs to be established; (2) a comprehensive compare of the economical type between D and B needs to be analyzed; (3) the conclusion of the fastest way to improve economic development needs to be reconsidered.
除非再加字数和段落，否则我真的找不到可以更改的地方了（因为题目的错太多了。所以还有好多让步攻击的方式，但是那样就太多字了。）………谦，明天就可以考试了。



Finally, even if those economic policies works in Beauville, the argument also based on this assumption that they are necessary. Yet this might not be the case. The Beauville government would have many other better choices, for example encouraging local people to start their own bussiness.(business)

In sum, the argument is not convincing. To bloster(bolster) the argument, the author must show that it is the economic proposals that lead to the relocation of the two manufacturing companies in Dillton, and the economic condition in Dillton is improving. In addition, the author must provide evidence that Dillton and Beauville's economic situation is similar thus the same economic proposal would achieve similar result in both places.

错别字自己改了再贴上来好么？大家的时间都很宝贵。
攻击点没问题，攻击力度欠缺。没有一个展开了攻击。用例子就多提几个可能性可能有更好的效果。

sharonyeUID: 2862009

9# zhangxiaohang1 谢谢晓航的修改，上次小谦也提了这个问题，其实我在交上来之前还看了几遍，单词还是粗心，可自己有时就是看不出来，可是关于标点的问题，我实在是不知道是怎么回事，难道有什么特殊的规定么？惭愧，我刚接触作文也就一个多礼拜，好多东西都不知道，可以帮忙告诉我么？