Argument109【六人作文小组】第1周第5次作业

空即是色UID: 2496914

Argument 109:
"Twenty years ago Pine City established strict laws designed to limit the number of new buildings that could be constructed in the city. Since that time the average housing prices in Pine City have increased considerably. Chestnut City, which is about the same size as Pine City, has over the past twenty years experienced an increase in average housing prices similar to Pine City, but Chestnut City never established any laws that limit new building construction. So it is clear that laws limiting new construction have no effect on average housing prices. So if Maple City were to establish strict laws that limit new building construction, these laws will have no effect on average housing prices."

The argument is well-presented, but some facts are still questionable. By comparing the increasing housing price between Pine City and Chestnut City, the author claims that Maple City should never establish laws as well as the Pine City for the less effect. Obviously it seems un-logical.

First of all, the author fails to consider the difference between PC, CC and MC. it is mentioned that because of the same size of these two cities, the law of circumscribing new building administered in PC but not in CC performs ineffectively, so that it would be the same to MC. However, it obviously tends to unconvinced. Such alternatives might include the level of economic condition, population, and the size of these cities. Perhaps CC has less population so that there is no need to establish more buildings, or in these 20 years the government of PC promulgated new policy that attracted more investment causes the high price. Also, it is possible that the reason why the price in CC has not risen up is the depressed economic situation.

In addition, the author provides no evidence to support the causal relationship between carrying out limitation on new building construction and increased housing prices in PC. Maybe it is just because the advancing economics changes people’s idea of living condition, the requirement that calls for more new buildings leads to a high price. Or a great number of people move from other cities to PC. Without such evidence, this conclusion is unconvinced.

The author assumes that the situation of CC will also take place in MC, but a twenty years time is so long for development of city to determine the effect of the law in MC. The sum of people is changing, the salary must be rising up, and the current money might devaluate.

半妖UID: 2328063

Argument 109: "Twenty years ago Pine City established strict laws designed to limit the number of new buildings that could be constructed in the city. Since that time the average housing prices in Pine City have increased considerably. Chestnut City, which is about the same size as Pine City, has over the past twenty years experienced an increase in average housing prices similar to Pine City, but Chestnut City never established any laws that limit new building construction. So it is clear that laws limiting new construction have no effect on average housing prices.推理So if Maple City were to establish strict laws that limit new building construction, these laws will have no effect on average housing prices."最终结论


个人认为原题推理如下：
PC限制了建筑数量—供小于求—房价上涨
但是 CC与PC同样大小—（故有同样的需求）—无建筑限制，供求平衡—其他因素导致房价上涨
故PC的房价上涨也不是供房受限，而是其他因素
MC若限制住房，也不会影响到房价
The argument (is)seems well-presented, but some facts are still questionable. By (comparing) presenting the increasing housing price both in (between) Pine City and Chestnut City, the author claims that Maple City should (never)not establish laws (as well as the Pine City) for (the)its little effect on constricting housing price (less effect). Obviously it is (seems) un-logical.First of all, the author fails to consider the difference between PC, CC and MC. it is mentioned that because of the same size of these two cities, the law of circumscribing new building administered in PC but not in CC performs ineffectively, so that it would be the same to MC. However, it obviously tends to unconvinced. Such alternatives和前一句没有什么逻辑联系，如果前一句直接说除了法律还有其他东东可以影响房价，然后再说such alternatives~~~~~~就比较连贯了。 might include the level of economic condition, population, and the size of these cities. Perhaps CC has less population so that there is no need to establish more buildings, 感觉这个实例没有阐述彻底，你的意思是不是即使没有法律限制，CC的住房数也是不变的，所以还是住房数量的limited导致了房价上涨？or in these 20 years the government of PC promulgated new policy that attracted more investment causes the high price. Also, it is possible that the reason why the price in CC has not risen up is the depressed economic situation. 感觉这段的论证有点乱。没有充分地阐述difference.In addition, the author provides no evidence to support the causal relationship between carrying out limitation on new building construction and increased housing prices in PC. Maybe it is just because the advancing economics changes people’s idea of living condition, the requirement that calls for more new buildings leads to a high price. Or a great number of people move from other cities to PC. Without such evidence, this conclusion is unconvinced.请注意，貌似作者想证明法律限制不会对房价有影响，而你不是要批驳作者的观点吗？请好好思考题目，写好提纲再下笔。The author assumes that the situation of CC will also take place in MC, but a twenty years time is so long for development of city to determine the effect of the law in MC. The sum of people is changing, the salary must be rising up, and the current money might devaluate.结尾最好是对前面观点的总括，而不是~~~~~

建议：请先把自己的观点表述清楚，再练习使用长难句。句子简洁、表意清晰、贴切才是我们应该追求的；另外，请先好好思考，然后再下笔，尽量分成几个好攻击的小点，然后恰当举例，对原文进行驳斥。而且缺乏结尾~~~~~~~~~~

LFU0795UID: 2561946

看不懂了啊






















免费小说

空即是色UID: 2496914

那啥。。我这篇其实木有写完。。昨天实在写的混乱的不行。。

半妖UID: 2328063

晕，至少结尾得写完再传上来吧，还是先重视结构，然后再修改词句。
这是已经在米国的师姐帮我改PS时给的建议，哈哈~~~~

xueyiUID: 2647060

同意半妖的推理。很好！