argument192 感觉有点闷，有空的同学打个分嘛！谢谢

eddiejUID: 200626

In this argument, the arguer claims that merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville is a good idea to eliminate some sorts of confusion. In addition, he points out that the savings in administrative costs would be enormous and no jobs in city government would be lost. Most importantly, the arguer asserts that the merger will attract business investments as Hamden and North Hamden did ten years ago. However, this argument is untenable for several critical flaws.
First of all,  there is no guarantee that the confusion will be eliminated exactly after merging. Even worse, maybe the situation will be more disordered than before because of efficient organization and management of these two townships. Moreover, the arguer fails to consider other methods that can solve the problem of these two towns with higher efficience. Thus there is no evidence that the mergence of the two is the best way.
In addition,  the mere fact that services would no longer be duplicated does not necessarily imply that the savings in administrative costs would be enormous. Although there would be only one government and tax department, the number of residents of two towns would not change, thus their demands would not decrease necessarily. Therefore, how to satisfy the demands of all residents is a big problem and the cost maybe higher than before because of the possible difficuls in harmony. Furthermore, now there would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on, it is unreasonable to conclude that no jobs in city government would be lost. Because the population would not decease while there would be only one government office thus the jobs would be insufficient.
Finally, it is unreasonable to assert that since the mergence of Hamden and North Hamden ten years ago was successful, it would be wise to merge Roseville and West Roseville exactly too, because there are different cultures, ideologies and financial situations. Moreover, the success of Hamden and North Hamden may caused by financial cooperation while the arguer does not mention such project in the mergence of Roseville and West Roseville.
All in all, the argument is not well reasoned because the evidence cited in analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the confusions will be eliminated exactly after merging and no jobs in city government would be lost. Additionaly, we would need more information about the successful mergence of Hamden and North Hamden.

eddiejUID: 200626

In this argument, the arguer claims that merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville is a good idea to eliminate some sorts of confusion. In addition, he points out that the savings in administrative costs would be enormous and no jobs in city government would be lost. Most importantly, the arguer asserts that the merger will attract business investments as Hamden and North Hamden did ten years ago. However, this argument is untenable for several critical flaws.

First of all,  there is no guarantee that the confusion will be eliminated exactly after merging. Even worse, maybe the situation will be more disordered than before because of efficient organization and management of these two townships. Moreover, the arguer fails to consider other methods that can solve the problem of these two towns with higher efficience. Thus there is no evidence that the mergence of the two is the best way.

In addition,  the mere fact that services would no longer be duplicated does not necessarily imply that the savings in administrative costs would be enormous. Although there would be only one government and tax department, the number of residents of two towns would not change, thus their demands would not decrease necessarily. Therefore, how to satisfy the demands of all residents is a big problem and the cost maybe higher than before because of the possible difficuls in harmony. Furthermore, now there would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on, it is unreasonable to conclude that no jobs in city government would be lost. Because the population would not decease while there would be only one government office thus the jobs would be insufficient.

Finally, it is unreasonable to assert that since the mergence of Hamden and North Hamden ten years ago was successful, it would be wise to merge Roseville and West Roseville exactly too, because there are different cultures, ideologies and financial situations. Moreover, the success of Hamden and North Hamden may caused by financial cooperation while the arguer does not mention such project in the mergence of Roseville and West Roseville.

All in all, the argument is not well reasoned because the evidence cited in analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the confusions will be eliminated exactly after merging and no jobs in city government would be lost. Additionaly, we would need more information about the successful mergence of Hamden and North Hamden.

eddiejUID: 200626

In this argument, the arguer claims that merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville is a good idea to eliminate some sorts of confusion. In addition, he points out that the savings in administrative costs would be enormous and no jobs in city government would be lost. Most importantly, the arguer asserts that the merger will attract business investments as Hamden and North Hamden did ten years ago. However, this argument is untenable for several critical flaws.

First of all,  there is no guarantee that the confusion will be eliminated exactly after merging. Even worse, maybe the situation will be more disordered than before because of lack of efficient organization and management of these two townships. Moreover, the arguer fails to consider other methods that can solve the problem of these two towns with higher efficiency. Thus there is no evidence that the mergence of the two is the best way.

In addition,  the mere fact that services would no longer be duplicated does not necessarily imply that the savings in administrative costs would be enormous. Although there would be only one government and tax department, the number of residents of two towns would not change, thus their demands would not decrease necessarily. Therefore, how to satisfy the demands of all residents with one government is a big problem and the cost maybe higher than before because of the possible difficulties in harmony. Furthermore, now that there would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on, it is unreasonable to conclude that no jobs in city government would be lost. Because the population would not decease while there would be only one government office thus the jobs would be insufficient.

Finally, even though the mergence of Hamden and North Hamden ten years ago was successful, there is no guarantee that it will work just as well for Roseville and West Roseville, because maybe there are different cultures, ideologies and financial situations. Moreover, the success of Hamden and North Hamden may caused by economic cooperation, while the arguer does not mention such project in the mergence of Roseville and West Roseville.

All in all, the argument is not well reasoned because the evidence cited in analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the confusions will be eliminated exactly after merging and no jobs in city government would be lost. Additionally, we would need more information about the successful mergence of Hamden and North Hamden.

eddiejUID: 200626

d

imjasonUID: 176604

你题目也没给，别人怎么给你看呢
模板的痕迹有点中，XDF的影响深远哈
没关系，多写多总结了
我开始也是那样的，虽然现在好象也没发现有什么改变，但至少尽量避免XDF模式了

eddiejUID: 200626

argument 192

猫猫624UID: 171232

楼主要把整个题目粘上来,别人才好给你看呀

eddiejUID: 200626

The following is a letter to the editor of the Roseville Gazette.
'Despite opposition from some residents of West Roseville, the arguments in favor of merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville are overwhelming. First, residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact when they need a service; for example, the police department in Roseville receives many calls from residents of West Roseville. This sort of confusion would be eliminated with the merger. Second, the savings in administrative costs would be enormous, since services would no longer be duplicated: we would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on. And no jobs in city government would be lost—employees could simply be reassigned. Most importantly, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments as it did when the townships of Hamden and North Hamden merged ten years ago.'