Argument17 提纲

Luise8891UID: 2906459

17The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ—which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks—has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."

Luise8891UID: 2906459

1)        The arguer fails to give necessary evidence to prove that citizens in Walnut Grove care more about the frequency of trash collection than how much more money they have to pay.
2)        The fact that EZ has ordered more trucks than ABC does not lend strong support to the assumption that EZ’s performance would be much better than ABC.Firstly,maybe 20 trucks are enough to handle this job.more trucks are costing  unnecessary money.Secondly, in some way, maybe compared with ABC,their performance is less efficient and therefore more people and trucks are needed.
3)        The arguer fails to convince us that the service of EZ is better than the service of ABC. First, Whether the service is satisfied or not is still open to doubt.secondly,Even if the service is satisfied ,no evidence has been given to prove that the residents will not be satisfied with ABC’s service.

刘文奇UID: 2850560

argument 17
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.
"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of   respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."

Walnut Grove的市委提议选择ABC Waste，而不是EZ Disposal（它是过去十年中和Walnut
Grove签约提供垃圾收集服务的机构），因为EZ最近把他们每月的收费从$2000提高到了$2500，而ABC仍然是$2000。但市委是错误的，我们应该继续使用EZ。EZ每周收集两次垃圾，而ABC只收集一次。而且，EZ当前的卡车拥有量和ABC一样都是20辆，但它已定购了更多的车辆。最后，EZ还提供优越的服务：去年市镇调查中80％的回应者同意他们对于EZ的表现是"满意"的。
论断：仅仅凭EZ最近把他们每月的收费从$2000提高到了$2500，而ABC仍然是$2000，Walnut Grove的市委议选择ABC Waste，而不是EZ Disposal，这种做法是草率的，但是，在信中给出市委做出错误决定的理由也是不充分的。
段二：EZ每周收集两次垃圾，而ABC只收集一次，这只能说明数量上的差别，并不能说明质量上的差别。也许ABC之所以只收集一次，是因为他们公司一次就做得很好。效果并不比EZ两次的效果差。还有一种可能，该镇的居民不是很多，每周收集一次垃圾就足够了。唯一有效的证据是比较两者的效果，看哪种效果更适合该镇的真实情况。
段三：EZ当前的卡车拥有量和ABC一样都是20辆，但它已定购了更多的车辆。把这个作为证据除了有以上那个问题之外，还有一个问题：新订购的卡车是不是一定用在该市？也许是因为该公司在拓展业务，用其他城市的垃圾处理。
段四：信中提到的调查结果并不能说明任何问题。因为这个调查只调查了EZ的满意度，却忽略了ABC。很有可能，人们对ABC的满意度会超过了EZ。
总结。