Argument17 【四海一家】第二次作业

Puppy22UID: 2239597

TOPIC: ARGUMENT17 - 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."
WORDS: 507          TIME: 0:41:54          DATE: 2007-2-3


The author obviously disagrees with the recommendation of ABC Waste from Walnut Grove's town council. On the contrary, the letter expresses the praise for the EZ Disposal, the former trash collection company who has served the town for the past ten years. And it strongly calls for the support of continuously hiring EZ Disposal as well. Collecting trash twice a week, additional trucks and public satisfaction from the residents in the town, these reasons seems persuasive enough. However, the statement above reveals that the author didn't provide concrete and convincing details to demonstrate EZ Disposal is superior to ABC Waste.

First of all, the significant reason that why the council chooses ABC Waste is the cost of trash collection. It is possible that EZ recently raised its charge which may jeopardize the financial situation of the town. During the past ten years, EZ had a nice cooperation with the town. As a result, the council must have considered the trash collection fee as a regular part of the budget. Since there is no information showing the increase of tax in the town, a raise of 25 percent of the trash collection cost may become a huge burden to a small town like Walnut Grove. Considering the budget problem, EZ Disposal has its disadvantage on price.

The second problem is the supporting evidence that the additional trucks of EZ is not able to stand up actually. Because there is no evidence showing that the fleet of 20 additional tracks from EZ is to be used in Walnut Grove, the connection between better service and the increase in the number of trucks is weak and pale. Moreover, the amount of trucks may enough since there is no complaint about the trash problem. It is the same with the number of services per week. No survey or investigation tells us that the town really demands trash collection twice a week. Considering the cost again, as well as the actual condition, ABC may be more cost-efficient according to the reality.

Finally, it is unfair to ABC Waste that the author suggests EZ's service is much better based on the past survey. The letter fails to provide facts that ABC does worse than EZ. Since the town has never tried ABC Waste once, we may assume that if the ABC has done the job in the past ten years, the satisfactory of the respondents would be up to 90 percent. In additional that the residents of Walnut Grove is more likely to concern about the service in the future then that in the past. Enjoying better service while having a lower cost will be fully supported by everyone.

In sum, the disagreement of the council decision and recommendation of EZ Disposal in the Walnut Grove town newspaper is not totally convincing. A scrutiny of the letter may provide more suspicion on the author. To better and fairly evaluate the two companies, a detailed comparison in services, cost, as well as the demand of the town should be offered as the supporting materials.

又写超时了,55555,虽然写到后面一半的时候电脑突然变得很慢但是也最多差5分钟………………希望以后能加油…………欢迎拍砖！

yuzhongwumeiUID: 2155222

The author obviously disagrees with the recommendation of ABC Waste from Walnut Grove's town council. On the contrary, 承接关系感觉不太恰当啊,这不构成转折啊the letter expresses the praise for(commend,glorify) the EZ Disposal, the former trash collection company who(是物不是人) has served the town for the past ten years. And it(是人不是物) strongly calls for the support of continuously hiring EZ Disposal as well. Collecting trash twice a week, additional trucks and public satisfaction from the residents in the town, these reasons seems persuasive enough. (感觉你这么说挺别扭的,改成这样好不好:the author's reasons, including A,B andC, seem to be persuasive)
However, the statement above reveals that the author didn't 时态provide concrete and convincing details to demonstrate EZ Disposal is superior to ABC Waste.

First of all, the(a) significant reason that why the council chooses ABC Waste is the cost of trash collection. It is possible that EZ recently raised its charge which may jeopardize the financial situation of the town. During the past ten years, EZ had a nice cooperation with the town. As a result, the council must have considered the trash collection fee as a regular part of the budget. Since there is no information showing the increase of tax in the town, a raise of 25 percent of the trash collection cost may become a huge burden to a small town like Walnut Grove. Considering the budget problem, EZ Disposal has its disadvantage on price.个人感觉:argu要找给定文章中的逻辑错误,不是作者观点的错误,不应该反击作者的观点,而应该指出为什么作者没能成功得捍卫自己的观点

The second problem is the supporting evidence that the additional trucks of EZ is not able to stand up (好象不太通顺哦)actually. Because there is no evidence showing that the fleet of 20 additional tracks from EZ is to be used in Walnut Grove, the connection between better service and the increase in the number of trucks is weak and pale. Moreover, the amount of trucks may enough since there is no complaint about the trash problem. It is the same with the number of services per week. No survey or investigation tells us that the town really demands trash collection twice a week. Considering the cost again, as well as the actual condition, ABC may be more cost-efficient according to the reality.这段观点比较好

Finally, it is unfair to ABC Waste that the author suggests EZ's service is much better based on the past survey. The letter fails to provide facts that ABC does worse than EZ. Since the town has never tried ABC Waste once, we may assume that if the ABC has done the job in the past ten years, the satisfactory of the respondents would be(might have been) up to 90 percent.(因为如果不这么改的话,楼主自己也无理假设了) In additional that(in addition,) the residents of Walnut Grove is more likely to concern about the service in the future then that in the past. Enjoying better service while having a lower cost will be fully supported by everyone.

In sum, the disagreement of the council decision and recommendation of EZ Disposal in the Walnut Grove town newspaper is not totally convincing. A scrutiny of the letter may provide more suspicion on the author. To better and fairly evaluate the two companies, a detailed comparison in services, cost, as well as the demand of the town should be offered as the supporting materials

总之还不错,这么段时间写了这么多,我一个多小时还没写这么多呢
建议楼主参考一下市面上的模版,会让你的文章锦上添花

yuzhongwumeiUID: 2155222

我觉得,argu应该是作者提出一个支持自己观点的理由,咱们证明那个理由并不充分
而第二段那个根本不是作者的理由,只是陈述一个背景,甚至是一个让步
所以不应该跟那个背景较真
不知道想得对不对~~