argu 237 求拍

upcdanielUID: 2982350

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: 389
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/12/31 10:30:11

Merely based on unwarranted evidences and suspicious assumption, the author draws a conclusion that providing tax incentives for the companies which relocate there is the fastest way for Beauville to stimulate
development. To substantiate this conclusion, the author cites the evidence that Dillton has took the same economic incentive plans. The author also provides that within 18 months, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton and 300 people were employed by them. At first glance, the argument appears to be somewhat convincing. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

I the first place, the author unfairly assumes that the two companies relocated there was due to Dillton`s incentive policies. However, no evidence has been provided to substantiate that this is the case. Lacking of such evidence, it is entirely possible that it is other reasons such as near to raw material supply or lower salaries for employees rather than the lower taxes that
encourage the two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton. Without ruling out these possibilities, the conclusion is unconvincing.

In the second place, even the incentive policies of Dillton do stimulated its economic development, the author falsely assume that in the future the same methods would be still effective. Perhaps in the following years, the macroeconomic environment would be bad than the past. Or perhaps with
increase number of factories move to their city, their workers ask for higher salary and
therefore these companies eventually move to other cities. Since the author fail to considering these possibilities, the conclusion is open to doubt.

Finally, the arguer`s recommendation relies on what might be a poor analogy between Dillton and Beauville. The analogy falsely depend on the assumption that the economic environment in both D and B are similar. However, it is entirely possible that the environment such as geographic location of D and B is different . In short ,without accounting for important possible between D and B, the author cannot reasonably prove the proposed methods will help B.

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive and the author should prove that the two companies relocated there was due to Dillton`s incentive policies. In addition, the author should demonstrate that in the future the economic incentive plans would be still effective. If the argument has included the factors given above, the argument would have been more thoroughly and logically acceptable.

半个小时草草写完，求拍。