argu99[lestou小组11月30日作业]

komy_leeUID: 2364433

上回的写成argu110了，这次把99补上。

The author, the economic minister of the small country Paucia, makes a recommendation in the argument that in order to improve the country’s balance of trade, Paucia should encourage farmers to cultivate a new variety of rice, which is used and contributes to the increase of rice output in its neighboring country. However, the argument suffers for some crucial flaws.

To begin with, , the author fails to consider other possible factors accounting to the increase of the rice output in Paucia’s neighboring country. According to the fact that after the new variety seed was cultivated the rice output increased. But no evidence is given to indicate that there is a causal correlation between the new variety and the increase of the rice output. Moreover, the author commits a false analogy between the two countries. Even if it is true that owning to adopt the newly developed variety of seed, Paucia’s neighboring country produced 80 percent more rice last year than in any previous year, but it does not follow that Paucia will inevitably benefit from the new variety of seed. The author fails to take the possible differences between the two countries into account. The weather, landform, and many other factors are likely to decide whether a variety of seed is suitable to be cultivated or not. It is highly possible that the new variety of seed favor wet weather of the neighboring country of Paucia while Paucia usually enjoys dry weather throughout a year. Without ruling out such possibilities, it is presumptuous to draw out any firm conclusion from the argument.

In the second place, the author assumes that to cultivate the newly developed variety of seed, the income of farmers’ income will increase. However, no information is provided to support the assumption. It is highly possible that the people are used to living on the traditional crops, therefore the newly variety of rice is not popular in market. And to export the rice to other countries will cost a lot of money in transporting. All in all, whether the income will increase or not depends on whether the rice will sell well in market, and it is also influenced by other factors such as the expense on fertilizer and transportation and so on. Accordingly, it is unfair to make any recommendation based on the ridiculous assumption.

Last but not least, the assumption that high yields of rice will improve Paucia’s balance of trade is open to doubt. The exportation of rice is just one of many factors affecting the balance trade are left out, its function in the trade of the country’s trade balance is overrated, while other important factors are left out. Absence of well-rounded consideration about the factors influencing the country’s trade, we will not accept any conclusion drawn from the assumption.

In sum, the flaws mentioned above all contribute to undermine the argument. To strengthen it, information about the two countries’ weather, landform and other natural conditions must be provided. Moreover, to better support the conclusion, the author should show us more evidence about the farmers’ income and Paucia’s trade balance.