Argument237 【SWEETBOX】 第七作业 by 小破孩

小破孩UID: 2125288

Argument 237
"According to a government report, last year the city of Dillton reduced its corporate tax rate by 15 percent; at the same time, it began offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities to any company that would relocate to Dillton. Within 18 months, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton, where they employ a total of 300 people. Therefore, the fastest way for Beauville to stimulate economic development and hence reduce unemployment is to provide tax incentives and other financial inducements that encourage private companies to relocate here."

Words: 564 Time: 32mins

In the above argument, the arguer suggests providing tax incentives and other financial encouragement to attract companies to relocate in Beauville (B) from past experience in Dillton (D). However, the author fails to analysis the real reason for the success of B. Nor does he/she evaluate the applicability of these financial regulation changes to B as illustrated below.

First of all, whether the development of D is solely due to its tax reducing and relocating grant policies is open to doubt. The mere fact that the two companies moved to D within 18 months after the action of new policies is insufficient to indicate their effectiveness. As a matter of fact, myriads of variables should be taken into consideration upon moving a manufacturing or any kind of corporate company. For instance, a company may investigate the availability of the raw materials, whether the city is located near to the areas producing these materials; the transportation system, whether it is convenience and economic to distribute their products; or the potential future development, whether the city is sited in a developing business center and so forth. Without specific discussion about the above aspects, the conclusion that it is those financial related policies attract more companies to D is too hasty.

Secondly, even if we concede it is exactly those financial policies in D that attract more companies, whether these companies' relocation could stimulate the local economic development needs further investigation. The fact that the companies employ 300 people indicates nothing about their role in boosting local economy. Neither are we provided about the job positions of these people or the magnitude population of D. If D is a metropolitan with millions of residents, 300 is really quite a small number. Additionally, there are many other influencing factors determine the economic development of a city, such as the condition of basic facilities, the connection between city with nearby industry areas and the future development plan of the government and so forth. Perhaps it is actually the superior in those conditions in D attract more business. Unless providing information related above, hardly can we get convinced from the arguer's assertion.

Moreover, the argument rests on a gratuitous presumption that the experience in D is equally applicable in B, which is unwarranted. We don't know the existing economic situations these two areas or their respective future development aim. It is possible that previously the tax rate in D is quite high before the regulation whereas that of B is already quite reasonable with sufficient grant load. It might also be the case that since D is in its initial developing stages, its government desires to attract more companies by relocation whereas B is already quite developed and the low unemployment is due to the high salaries of the family rather than less opportunities. Therefore, more training programs and proper education would be a reasonable choice for B's development. Or perhaps government in B put the tourism industry in the first priority, thus any manufactory or engineering companies would not be so much welcomed due to potential environment damage which may even exacerbate the local economy. Either of the above scenarios, if true, would cause great suspicion about the arguer’s suggestion which might be useless for the economic development in B.

Taken together, the above argument is not well reasoned as it stands. In order to strength it, the arguer should provide detail analysis of the economic situation and job market in D and B, and their development aim accordingly. Otherwise, the arguer's advice cannot be adopted.

mym1102UID: 2326718

很想找点意见，可是水平不够。
多谢你该我的作文，请你以后也多改我的作文，不用可客气，狠拍就行了。
我觉得你的作文语言特别好，尤其是上一次的issue，各类句型大批照顾到了。
真不知道你是怎么能在这么短的时间里写这么多的单词，
不知道我能不能练到你这个水平。
佩服。向你学习。

jiangyue011UID: 2340595

In the above argument, the arguer suggests providing tax incentives and other financial encouragement to attract companies to relocate in Beauville (B) from past experience in Dillton (D). However, the author fails to analysis the real reason for the success of B. Nor does he/she evaluate the applicability of these financial regulation changes to B as illustrated below.
挺好的开头.

First of all, whether the development of D is solely due to its tax reducing and relocating grant policies is open to doubt. The mere fact that the two companies moved to D within 18 months after the action of new policies is insufficient to indicate their effectiveness. As a matter of fact, myriads of variables should be taken into consideration upon moving a manufacturing or any kind of corporate company. (这几句承接很好,有70多字而不嫌罗唆.) For instance, a company may investigate the availability of the raw materials, whether the city is located near to the areas producing these materials; the transportation system, whether it is convenience (convenient)and economic to distribute their products; or the potential future development, whether the city is sited in a developing business center and so forth. Without specific discussion about the above aspects, the conclusion that it is those financial related policies attract more companies to D is too hasty.

Secondly, even if we concede it is exactly those financial policies in D that attract more companies, whether these companies' relocation could stimulate the local economic development needs further investigation. The fact that the companies employ 300 people indicates nothing about their role in boosting local economy. Neither are we provided about the job positions of these people or the magnitude population of D. If D is a metropolitan with millions of residents, 300 is really quite a small number. (这点讲雇用工人的情况似乎和经济的好坏还不是直接联系,你觉得呢)Additionally, there are many other influencing factors determine the economic development of a city, such as the condition of basic facilities, the connection between city with nearby industry areas and the future development plan of the government and so forth. Perhaps it is actually the superior in those conditions in D attract more business. Unless providing information related above, hardly can we get convinced from the arguer's assertion.

Moreover, the argument rests on a gratuitous presumption that the experience in D is equally applicable in B, which is unwarranted. We don't know the existing economic situations these two areas or their respective future development aim. It is possible that previously the tax rate in D is quite high before the regulation whereas that of B is already quite reasonable with sufficient grant load. It might also be the case that since D is in its initial developing stages, its government desires to attract more companies by relocation whereas B is already quite developed and the low unemployment is due to the high salaries of the family rather than less opportunities. Therefore, more training programs and proper education would be a reasonable choice for B's development. Or perhaps government in B put the tourism industry(呵呵,想得很多,很周到) in the first priority, thus any manufactory or engineering companies would not be so much welcomed due to potential environment damage which may even exacerbate the local economy. Either of the above scenarios, if true, would cause great suspicion about the arguer’s suggestion which might be useless for the economic development in B.

Taken together, the above argument is not well reasoned as it stands. In order to strength it, the arguer should provide detail analysis of the economic situation and job market in D and B, and their development aim accordingly. Otherwise, the arguer's advice cannot be adopted.

总之,我觉得这是一篇高于5分的文章, 且在这么短的时间内完成了!