argument17 十二月高强组第二周周二作业

waidswUID: 2256074

题目：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."
字数：460          用时：0:30:00          日期：2006-11-27

1 委员会不用EZ是不是仅仅是经济上原因；
2 调查不可信
3 订购新卡车和一个星期收两次垃圾不能说明服务质量高
4 价格高是个劣势
The arguer claims that the town council should continue using EZ instead of switching to ABC. To support this claim, the arguer provides that even though the price of EZ has increased, EZ collects trash twice a week, and currently has ordered additional truck. In addition, the arguer also points out that the 80 percent respondents have expressed their satisfaction with EZ's performance. The claim seems appealing at first glance. Careful scrutiny of the evidences, however, reveals that the claim is specious as it stand.

To begin with, the arguer fail to clearly illustrate us what is the main reason that town council change the trash collection company. It is very likely that other respects, such as yet the environmental sound disposal of the trash, the instable of the leadership of the EZ, or the disordered management rather than merely the costs that cause the council to switch company. Without ruling out such possibilities, all the evidences that the arguer offers are persuasive in the least.

Secondly, the arguer fails to convince us that the survey is reliable and representative. The reliability of a survey is based on the number and distribution of samples and the scientific methods. Lack any of this information; the survey lends little support to the claim. Moreover, the survey is barely based upon the respondent which arise our suspicion about the credibility about the survey.

Thirdly, the mere fact that EZ has ordered additional truck has little to do with the arguer's contention. The greater number of trucks does not necessary means that the higher quality of service. Perhaps the additional trucks are designed to use in other towns. In addition, the fact that EZ collect trash twice a week is too vague to make any conclusion upon. As mentioned above, the amount has little relationship with the quality and it is the quality that makes sense. Maybe the ABC implements new technologies that is much more efficient than others and only collect trash once a week could fulfill the needs.

Last but not least, the higher price is a disadvantage of ABC. Lack any justifiable proof to prove that ABC cannot offer a similar service, probably even better, with the lower costs. There is no reason not to choose ABC for alternation. In addition, it is probably that even if the service if EZ is better, the council doesn’t have enough money to pay because of the limited budget, or the residents do not willing to pay extra money.

To sum up, the arguer's claim is unsubstantiated as it stand, to strengthen the claim, the arguer should offer more specific information to convince us that the switch is due to the price and EZ actually do better than ABC which worth the higher costs.