Argument17 [OB小组]_第2次作业_EZ与ABC Waste垃圾回收

ldongxpUID: 2311083

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: 432          TIME: 00:40:00          DATE: 2007-7-15

In this argument, the author recommends that Walnut Grove's town council continue to contract with EZ Disposal rather than switching to ABC Waste. To support this recommendation, the author points out that the trash collecting frequency of EZ is higher than ABC Waste though the fee of EZ is $500 more than the fee of ABC Waste. The author also notes that though the current numbers of trucks in both companies are equal, the EZ has ordered additional trucks. Finally, the author cites a recent survey in which 80% respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the service of EZ. However, this recommendation suffers from several critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

First of all, the fact that EZ collects trash twice as often as ABC Waste does not necessarily indicate that Grove's town council should continue to contract with EZ. If collecting trash once a week is enough to keep the living environment of the citizens clean, the additional collecting of EZ makes nonsense and there is no necessary to cost $500 more every month.

Secondly, the fact that EZ has ordered additional trucks has little indication that EZ would provide better service than ABC Waste does. Perhaps the new trucks ordered by EZ is not about to be using for the service of Walnut Grove. Or perhaps the EZ use fewer trucks to collect trash in Walnut Grove and provides poorer service than ABC Waste though they have the same numbers of trucks. It is also entirely possible that the trucks of ABC Waste are more powerful than those of EZ and can provide better service. In short, that EZ has ordered additional trucks cannot well support the author's recommendation.

Finally, the result of the survey provides little support to the author's recommendation. The author fails to provide evidence that those respondents of the survey are representative of the overall population of people whose trash is collected by EZ. Moreover, even the result of this survey is objective and precise. It is possible that the ABC Waste would provide better service than EZ. Without evidence to support the statistical reliability of the survey and ruling out this possibility, the author cannot make a persuasive recommendation.

In sum, the recommendation is not well supported. To bolster it the author must provide evidence that Walnut Grove would benefit from the additional trash collection each week, and that EZ would use additional trucks to provide better service than ABC Waste. To better assess this recommendation, more information about the services of both companies and more detail about EZ are needed.