argument10【0906G ANap Hand 作文互改小组】第一次作业 by irvine666

irvine666UID: 2575525

TOPIC: ARGUMENT10 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a Batavia newspaper.
"The department of agriculture in Batavia reports that the number of dairy farms throughout the country is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago. During this same time period, however, the price of milk at the local Excello Food Market has increased from $1.50 to over $3.00 per gallon. To prevent farmers from continuing to receive excessive profits on an apparently increased supply of milk, the Batavia government should begin to regulate retail milk prices. Such regulation is necessary to ensure both lower prices and an adequate supply of milk for consumers."
WORDS: 404          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2008-12-26 下午 04:06:29

提纲：
1.一个food market 涨价并不意味着总体价格上涨
2.即使总体价格上涨也不意味着农民收入excessive增加
3.限制价格并不保证有合适的供应

In the argument, the Batavia government decides to regulate the price of milk, because the farmers have received excessive profits from the inordinate increasing price. However, to my understanding, the ultimateness still suffers from several critical fallacies.

Primarily, it is not cogent that the increasing price of milk at the local Excello Food Market illustrates the rise of area price of milk. Maybe the local Excello Food Market suffers a financial crisis, they have to raise the price of most of their goods to help them fending off the catastrophe, while the price in other Food Markets sustains the same level as it was 10 years ago. Even if the prices of milk in all Food Markets have reached a higher level, there is no enough evidence to support all price of milk has increased too. Perhaps, milk retail dealers buy milk directly from the famers and sell it to their customers at a much lower price than the Food Market. So the conclusion: the price of milk has increased is not persuasive.

Furthermore, even though the price is much higher than it was 10 years ago, there is no evidence can demonstrate that the profits of milk farmers are excessively increased. Farmers may pay more for milk delivery, fodder, and labour force than they paid 10 years ago. For instance, probably they used tractors to deliver milk from their dairy farms to the Food Markets decade ago; however, they are now apt to use the trucks with refrigeratory equipment to ensure milk good taste. Moreover, even I concede that farmers gain inordinate profits, probably the standard of livings of farmers has decreased due to the inflation, thus the regulation is not suitable.

Finally, there is no guarantee that the regulation of retail prices of milk will do its job well. The fall of price may leads to the increase of sells, thus accelerates the amount of products, and then influences the balance between milk production and sell. The Batavia government shows no evidence, nor conducts any survey to "ensure" the conclusion: the appearance of both lower prices and an adequate supply of milk for consumers in the future.

To sum up, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. The government should provide more evidence and conduct survey to reinforce its recommendation, and more background information of Batavia should be furnished, such as the financial status of Food Markets and the living standards of citizens.

goingeastUID: 2439824

嘿嘿，先回复下，不错哦。。我才写325字。。

stupidken2oUID: 2541049

In the argument, the Batavia government decides to regulate the price of milk（不是政府决定去调控牛奶的价格，是writer的主观偏见）, because the farmers have received excessive profits from the inordinate increasing price（这个原因你是自己造出来的，即使是这篇的argument也没有提到）. However, to my understanding, the ultimateness still suffers from several critical fallacies.

Primarily, it is not cogent that the increasing price of milk at the local Excello Food Market illustrates the rise（rising？） of area price of milk. Maybe the local Excello Food Market suffers a financial crisis, they have to raise the price of most of their goods to help them fending off the catastrophe（感觉这个理由很牵强，而且几乎不大可能）, while the price in other Food Markets sustains the same level as it was 10 years ago（这个sustains the same level as it was 10 years ago哪里来的）. Even if the prices of milk in all Food Markets have reached a higher level, there is no enough evidence to support all price of milk has increased too. Perhaps, milk retail dealers buy milk directly from the famers and sell it to their customers at a much lower price than the Food Market. So the conclusion: the price of milk has increased is not persuasive.（感觉你的一个food market 涨价并不意味着总体价格上涨这个理由很牵强，一个market单方面提高自己的milk价格不太可能，或者应该从经济规律讨论，farms数量增加了，价格翻了倍，原因很多，可能是需求紧缺，所以很多人去开farms，价格也上涨了；也可能是通货膨胀；又或者可能是恶意操纵市场，个人见解）

Furthermore, even though the price is much higher than it was 10 years ago, there is no evidence can demonstrate that the profits of milk farmers are excessively increased. Farmers may pay more for milk delivery, fodder, and labour force than they paid 10 years ago（这句如果用pay做主语感觉好点吧）. For instance, probably they used tractors to deliver milk from their dairy farms to the Food Markets decade ago; however, they are now apt to use the trucks with refrigeratory equipment to ensure milk good taste. Moreover, even I concede that farmers gain inordinate profits, probably the standard of livings of farmers has decreased due to the inflation, thus the regulation is not suitable.

Finally, there is no guarantee that the regulation of retail prices of milk will do its job well（强调语气比较好）. The fall of price may leads to the increase of sells, thus accelerates the amount of products, and then influences the balance between milk production and sell（这句用从句改呢？）. The Batavia government shows no evidence, nor conducts any survey to "ensure" the conclusion: the appearance of both lower prices and an adequate supply of milk for consumers in the future.（这段感觉没说到点子上，应该强调说明仅仅调节价格不一定能达到目的，然后说明影响balance的因素有哪些，再归纳下，去反驳writer）

To sum up, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. The government should provide more evidence and conduct survey to reinforce its recommendation（不是government，这argument的观点都是writer的）, and more background information of Batavia should be furnished, such as the financial status of Food Markets and the living standards of citizens.

irvine666UID: 2575525

恩，仔细看过了，多谢楼上指出
首先，说government确实是我的失误，这东西其实是author的...
其次，倒数2段确实没说清楚，因为限时没时间打字了，我本来还想搞点经济学的理论的...
最后是我自己总结出来的自己的错误：我的让步结构存在问题，总论点后我直接抛出了让步的例子了，没有论证。这个显得论证不得力。
不过我觉得，因为author说只调查了一个food market ，所以的确存在论据不足的问题，这个是可以反驳的，所以说：一个food market 涨价并不意味着总体价格上涨，其实是可以说的通的。我也承认你所举的可能性更加合理，我那些可能性比较钻牛角尖了...不过对比那篇：垃圾收购公司的车不一定是用来运垃圾的...我觉得我的这些个理由还是说的过去的
另外para2 那个as same as 10 years ago 是一个while带的maybe从句

Any way, 3Q^^

[ 本帖最后由 irvine666 于 2008-12-28 00:12 编辑 ]

stupidken2oUID: 2541049

恩，我也是第一次接触argument，所以指出的不好~多多海涵啊~