Argument214 【Chasing For "6" Score】第一次作业

绝望的人流浪UID: 2188756

Argument 214
In each city in the region of Treehaven, the majority of the money spent on government-run public school education comes from taxes that each city government collects. The region's cities differ, however, in the value they place on public education. For example, ParsonCity typically budgets twice as much money per year as BlueCity does for its public schools—even though both cities have about the same number of residents. It seems clear, therefore, that ParsonCity residents care more about public school education than do BlueCity residents.

Outline
1. The total budget of the city not mentioned in the argument
  Money from the budget is not the only way
2. The number of children who need the public school
3. Same residents does not suggest same children, the price level of the two cities
In this argument the arguer points out that the Parson City residents care more about public school education than do Blue City residents.　To support the conclusion the arguer take the analysis of the budget as the evidence.　The argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumption, which considered together render the argument wholly unconvincing.

Number 404　 Time:　　　　Date　2.1.2007
First of all, the total budgets of the cities are not mentioned in the argument. Although ParsonCity spent twice as much as BlueCity does, this do not means it spent a larger portion of the budget. Maybe the revenue of the BlueCity is less that half of ParsonCity which suggests the Blue city spent a larger part of their budgets. Percentage may be more nicety show the care than the absolute number. Suppose that ParsonCity does spend more both absolute number and portion of the budget. The money from the budget is not the only way. Although the majority of the money spend on public school is from the tax. Other ways are also possible. The blue city can get more from the funds of the residents’ donation. Considered this the number of the budget of the BlueCity spend on public school is enough. Then who spend more money on the public school overall is not certain.

In addition, the numbers of the children who attend public school are not mentioned. MaybeBlueCity have more well build private school which provide higher quality of education. So the number of the children who need public school of Blue City may be less that of ParsonCity and so does the need of budget. In this condition, compared to the ParsonCity, each child in the public school may get more support of money.

Finally, the arguer does not keep other condition the same. For example, the same number of residents does not suggest the same number of the children. The different age of the two cities may leads to different number of the children. Another important factor the arguer do not mentioned is the price level of the two cities. Maybe the price level in ParsonCity is so high that twice the amount of the money can not provide education as good as BlueCity.

To sum up, this argument is filled with untenable statements as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, which render it unacceptable and beg further and more comprehensive consideration.

leiniaUID: 156136

In this argument the arguer points out that the Parson City residents care more about public school education than do Blue City residentsdo.　To support the conclusion the arguer take the analysis of the budget as the evidence.　The argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which considered together render the argument wholly unconvincing.

First of all, the total budgets of the cities are not mentioned in the argument. Although ParsonCity spent twice as much as BlueCity does, this do not means it spent a larger portion of the budget. Maybe the revenue of the BlueCity is less thatthan half of ParsonCity which suggests the Blue city spent a larger part of their budgets. Percentage may be more nicety show the care than the absolute number represent the concerns of the residents better than the numbers do. Suppose that ParsonCity does spend more both absolute number and portion of the budget. The money from the budget is not the only way. Although the majority of the money spend on public school is from the tax. Other ways are also possible觉得这可以另起一段. The blue city can get more from the funds of the residents’ donation. Considered this the number of the budget of the BlueCity spend on public school is enough. Then who spend more money on the public school overall is not certain.

In addition, the numbers of the children who attend public school are not mentioned. Maybe BlueCity have more well build private school which provide higher quality of education. So the number of the children who need public school of Blue City may be less that of ParsonCity and so does the need of budget. In this condition, compared to the ParsonCity, each child in the public school may get more support of money不是孩子得到资助，而是学校本身.

Finally, the arguer does not keep other condition the same. For example, the same number of residents does not suggest the same number of the children. The different age of the two cities may leads to different number of the children前面一段已经提到孩子人数的问题了，这里再提有点重复了. Another important factor the arguer do not mentioned is the price level of the two cities. Maybe the price level in ParsonCity is so high that twice the amount of the money can not provide education as good as BlueCity这个观点不错.

To sum up, this argument is filled with untenable statements as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, which render it unacceptable and beg further and more comprehensive consideration.
作者的argument还是不错的