argument17 51互助小组第四次作业

gluttonUID: 2330210

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:          TIME:           DATE:
  The arguer claim that the we should continue using EZ as our trash collection company, the reasons the arguer presents seems logical at first sight. But after close scrutiny, we find them suffer several flaws.

   To begin with, the major flaw in the argument is that other factors that the council
recommend the ABC Waste are not considered. The arguer claims that the only reason why council recommends  changing our services to  ABC is that EZ raise its fee while ABC' s fee remains the same. It seems like the council just corncerned about the mount of money used to collect waste. However, and possibly there are other alternative reasons, perhaps it is because ABC recently adopt new technology to promote its work efficiency, then with the new technology not only can ABC collect the trash more efficienctly, but it can also collect the trash using costume-oriented method, which means each house can desigh its own schedule of garbage collecting. Maybe it is because ABC provide additional services to the residents besides collecting trash, ABC probably provide such services such as extra free house-cleaning every month, chance to win a lottery if adopt the ABC service etc. The arguer failed to realise these possibilities as the mentioned above why the council want to switch to ABC render the argument unconvicing.

    Secondly, some method adopted by EZ are not likely as useful as it seems. EZ collects trash twice a week does not neccessarily mean that this will benefit the citizens more than just collecting trash once a week, it is possible that collecting trash once a week is
enough.  And although EZ ordered additional trucks, these trucks can not promote the
company' s service, for the number of citizens in the town mayremain the same, and the trash created by each person do not change either. Therefore we need just the same number of trucks as before, and the extra trucks may be usefulless for collecting trash.

   Finally, the survey's result that 80 percent of respondents satisfied that service of EZ
does not mean the respondents will not satisfied the ABC, for the respondents have not ever experinced the services provived by ABC. ABC possiblely will do far better than EZ, and adopting the service provided by ABC will be beneficial to our citizens, the residents will regret not to switch to ABC earlier after experiencing the service provided by ABC.

  In sum, the arguer failed to consider other reasons that the council recommend switching to ABC, and we should give a more closer examination about whether the trash needed to be collected twice a week, and whether more trash trucks is needed in the town.            

ruczephyrUID: 2181202

The arguer claim that the we should continue using EZ as our trash collection company, the reasons the arguer presents seems logical at first sight. But after close scrutiny, we find them suffer several flaws.

   To begin with, the major flaw in the argument is that other factors that the council
recommend the ABC Waste are not considered. The arguer claims that the only reason why council recommends  changing our services to  ABC is that EZ raise its fee while ABC' s fee remains the same. It seems like the council just corncerned about the mount of money used to collect waste. However, and possibly there are other alternative reasons, perhaps it is because ABC recently adopt new technology to promote its work efficiency, then with the new technology not only can ABC collect the trash more efficienctly, but it can also collect the trash using costume-oriented method, which means each house can desigh its own schedule of garbage collecting. Maybe it is because ABC provide additional services to the residents besides collecting trash, ABC probably provide such services such as extra free house-cleaning every month, chance to win a lottery if adopt the ABC service etc. The arguer failed to realise these possibilities as the mentioned above why the council want to switch to ABC render the argument unconvicing.感觉这一段象在立论,而不是驳斥作者的观点.而且个人认为这个钱的问题不是批驳的重点,议论分论点,论据,论证,而这个钱的这一部分完全不属于这3个部分其中之一.

    Secondly, some method adopted by EZ are not likely as useful as it seems,so?. EZ collects trash twice a week does not neccessarily mean that this will benefit the citizens more than just collecting trash once a week, it is possible that collecting trash once a week is
enough.  And although EZ ordered additional trucks, these trucks can not promote the
company' s service, for the number of citizens in the town mayremain the same, and the trash created by each person do not change either. Therefore we need just the same number of trucks as before, and the extra trucks may be usefulless for collecting trash. 没有自己结论!!

   Finally, the survey's result that 80 percent of respondents satisfied that service of EZ
does not mean the respondents will not satisfied the ABC, for the respondents have not ever experinced the services provived by ABC. ABC possiblely will do far better than EZ, and adopting the service provided by ABC will be beneficial to our citizens, the residents will regret not to switch to ABC earlier after experiencing the service provided by ABC.这一点似乎反驳偏了,第一这个万恶的survey还是应该批,这里的survey还是有明显错误的,第2这里作为批驳作者的理由似乎也不是那么令人信服,说那里的人不知道ABC的服务质量,如果知道EZ的服务质量好的话还是肯定会选择EZ的.这里不如说第一这个survey不一定能说明EZ服务好,第2就算EZ以前服务好不代表以后的也会继续好.

  In sum, the arguer failed to consider other reasons that the council recommend switching to ABC, and we should give a more closer examination about whether the trash needed to be collected twice a week, and whether more trash trucks is needed in the town.