AGUMENT17,4月16号就要考了，大家帮忙拍一拍吧，谢谢了

clara665UID: 2307585

题目：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."
字数：387          用时：0:39:56          日期：2007-3-28

In this argument, the arguer recommends that Walnut Grove's town council should keep employing EZ to collect trash. though the monthly fee has been raised by a quarter percent .To justify the claim, the arguer points out that EZ collects trash once more as ABC do per week. In addition, he shows the fact that EZ which currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks to support its recommendation .Moreover the arguer cites the result of survey that 80 percent of respondents satisfied with EZ's service .This argument suffers from several critical fallacies.
In the first place, the arguer simply assumes that the effect of collecting trash twice a week by EZ is better than only once a week by ABC, but he does not provide any sufficient evidence that could strongly support the claim. It is entirely possible that just working in Walnut Grove once a week by ABC can do as well as EZ, maybe even better .Therefore, even though the working frequency in EZ is more than that in ABC， there is no guarantee that EZ performs better than ABC.
In the second place, the arguer fails to establish a direct causal relationship between the number of trucks and the quality of service. It is true that owning more trucks may promote expanding the business, but we are not ensure that the quality of service will be improved in EZ. In addition, the arguer fails to convince us that 20 trucks can not afford   serving in Walnut Glove. Unless the arguer provides sufficient evidence that owning more trucks will contribute to high quality of service, the assumption that EZ is better than ABC is dubious.
Another point worth considering is the result of survey last year says little to demonstrate claim maintained by the author. Firstly, the fact many residents are satisfied with EZ's performance does not eliminate the possibility that these residents will be satisfied with ABC's performance. Perhaps even more people prefer the ABC's service. secondly , even if those who responded to the survey were only satisfied with EZ's performance, which is ,of course, unwarranted, because the arguer fails to take into account other residents who have not responded to survey. Without ruling out the possible scenarios, the result of survey is unless to validate the recommendation.
In conclusion, the argument is indefensible as it stands. To strengthen it the author must proved more evidences about provide of the comparison between EZ and ABC. To better evaluate this argument, we need further demonstration of the representation of the survey.