Argument237 【☆09GRE作文冲刺组】swbai3月6日作文

swbaiUID: 2600532

题目：ARGUMENT237 - The following appeared as part of an article in a local Beauville newspaper.
"According to a government report, last year the city of Dillton reduced its corporate tax rate by 15 percent; at the same time, it began offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities to any company that would relocate to Dillton. Within 18 months, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton, where they employ a total of 300 people. Therefore, the fastest way for Beauville to stimulate economic development and hence reduce unemployment is to provide tax incentives and other financial inducements that encourage private companies to relocate here."
字数：378          用时：0:30:00          日期：2009-3-6
In this argument the author recommends that Beauville should make a stimulat economic development as Dillton. To support this recommendation, the author cites the following facts about Dillton: (1) Dillton reduced its corporate tax rate late year; (2) Dillton offering relocation grants to companies; (3) two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

First, reducing corporate tax of Beauville do not necessarily indicate that company are willing to relocate on Beauville. Perhaps Beauville is to far away from the sea, which means what the goods of Beauville must travel very far to sell it, while Dillton is very near the sea, and transporting goods cost little. And this is the true reason that companies choose Dillton, not because its reduction on corporate tax. For that matter, perhaps the pay in Dillton is cheaper than any other places, so the companies are willing to come there to make more profits. In short, without ruling other possible reasons for the reducing of corporate tax, the author cannot convince me on the basis of them that Dillton attracted corporations because of it.

Second, even if Dillton began offering relocation grants, the author assumes further that it can reduce the unemployment rate of Dillton. The companies may take serious conderation of it, and it is not simple as only concerns with favorable rate on city utilities. Perhaps without the relocation grants of Dillton, the two companies are still willing to relocate.

Finally, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton accomplish noting toward bolstering the recommendation. The companies moved to Dillton within 18 months, which means, they may move in Dillton before Dillton reduced its tax rate. Besides, the two companies only employed 300 people in total, which is few compared to the amount of people in Dillton, and has nothing to do with the unployment of Dillton.

In conclusion, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumption that renders it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation, the author must provide clear evidence--perhaps by local study--that the situation of Dillton is similar to that of Beauville. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know why the two companies moved to Dillton in 18 months.