ARGUMENT17 【天道酬勤作文互改小组】第十三次作业

alarenmingUID: 2329302

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: 348          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2007-7-13 14:40:15

The author did not agree with the council's suggestion that switch from EZ to ABC for trash collection services in Walnut Grove. He owned an opposite opinion based on several reasons. But in further look, you will find it is groundless.

in the first place, the speaker made in short of legitimacy assuming it is the reason why the council advocate to use ABC that EC recently raised its monthly fee whereas ABC does not change at all. there is no evidence showed in the argument this is the reason. It is possible that the decision is totally out of the environmental consideration. ABC does well in the aspect than EC. Without excluding this possibility, It is too immaturea to contribute this advocation to the price's change.

at the second place, the reasons listed in the following could not prove the speaker's viewpoint that EC is the wiser choice than ABC. first, the times of collection can not be a standard to judge whether a trash collection service is good or not. even though the ABC collects only once in a week, it is more clearer than EC which collects twice in a week. The possibility can not be ruled out that the effect of ABC is higher than EC. Second, the amount of trucks may have nothing to do with the quality of service. Even EC has more trucks than before, we can not guarantee EC will use it. It is possible that this is only a method to attract more customers. third, the speaker indicate the exceptional service without any further introduction. We do not even know what kind of service it offered. In the meanwhile, for the speaker do not mention, we have reason that ABC also offer such exceptional service. In this sense, it is not persuaded to advise to adopt EC rather than ABC.

In the last place, even if 80 percent of respondents agree that they were satisfied with EZ last year, it do not guarantee the same situation will happen this year and in the future.

In sum, the author should be more perspective and think things as a whole, the statement can be more persuaded.