Argument2 【0806G-Sunbird小组】Norman第2次作业

norman518UID: 188582

TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
WORDS: 308          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-11-10
Modify:586

In this letter, based on an assumption that taking restrictions on yards' landscape and homes' appearance leads to increase real property values, a committee of Deerhaven Acres suggests that the similar restrictions should be taken in Deerhaven Acres in order to promote its real property values. To strengthen it, the committee cites an example in nearby Brookville. However, this suggestion relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and then is irrational as its stands.

In the first place, the assumption that taking restricted measures will lead to higher estate values is untenable. Form the letter, the committee fails to provide evidence to illuminate that the triple times of property values in Brookville must result from restrictions on yards’ landscape and houses' appearance. Common senses tell us that the values of estates are the function of supply and demand. It is high likely that the restrictions adopted in Brookville had indeed been carried on but failed, and the local government took another measures to improve the environment of investment, to protect local biosystem, to promote local tourism, and then lead to local economic prosperity-- an amount of funds instilled in, a lots of employee and investors poured in, and so on-- which is the fatal factor resulting in the values promotion of real estates. If the committee cannot rule out above alternative explains, its premise of suggestion is also pregnable, let alone to his suggestion based on it.

Even if the promotion of estates values in Brookville dose result from the restrictions of yard’s landscape and home’s exteriors, the committee’s suggestion rests on another assumption that the situations of two areas is similar. If the committee takes no account of the difference on geography and economy in the two areas, his suggestion is still assailable. It is likely possible that Brookville is a seashore city and its economic backbone is mainly the tourism, then it is rational to enhance its property values through restrictions on landscaped yards and pointed building appearances; on the other hand, if the Deerhaven Acres is located among mountains and its economic artery is factory and agriculture, maybe improving the environment of investment and absorbing immigrant rather than taking restrictions on building are effective measures to raise estates values.

Even if the situation between Brookville and Deerhaven is similar and it is an effective way for them to take on restriction for the promotion of real values, the committee’s suggestion is also based on other assumption on the time factor. It is totally possible that the atmosphere today is distinct form seven years before, maybe the whole country including Brookville and Deerhaven was on the economical depression, but now the country is on the heyday, maybe inhabitants in Brookville had been inclined to uniform appearance of house seven years ago, but now residents in Deerhaven prefer to multi-colored and individual style on their houses. So on today in Deerhaven, it is clear that to simply go on the measure of restrictions will also restrict residents’ desires to purchase local houses, let alone to increase real values. If the committee in Deerhaven cannot take into account of times difference, the suggestion is vulnerable too.

In sum, from above discussion, the committee’s suggestion is full of logical flaws as it stands. To strengthen it, the committee should provide more evidences to illuminate that the measure of restrictions is the main reason to increase real values in Brookville. To better evaluate it, the committee should rule out those differences of geography and time between two areas.

Bellona0428UID: 2418798

呵呵     写的太好了，很流畅，分析也到位。  ~~~我写这篇文章时很费劲，写文了也感觉很生涩~~~

In this letter, based on an assumption that taking restrictions on yards' landscape and homes' appearance leads to increase real property values, a committee of Deerhaven Acres suggests that the similar restrictions should be taken in Deerhaven Acres in order to promote its real property values. To strengthen it, the committee cites an example in nearby Brookville. However, this suggestion relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and then is irrational as its stands.

In the first place, the assumption that taking restricted measures will lead to higher estate values is untenable. Form the letter, the committee fails to provide evidence to illuminate that the triple times of property values in Brookville must result from restrictions on yards’ landscape and houses' appearance. Common senses tell us that the values of estates are the function of supply and demand. It is high likely that the restrictions adopted in Brookville had indeed been carried on but failed, and the local government took another measures to improve the environment of investment, to protect local biosystem, to promote local tourism, and then lead to local economic prosperity-- an amount of funds instilled in, a lots of employee and investors poured in, and so on-- which is the fatal factor resulting in the values promotion of real estates. If the committee cannot rule out above alternative explains, its premise of suggestion is also pregnable, let alone to his suggestion based on it.

Even if the promotion of estates values in Brookville dose result from the restrictions of yard’s landscape and home’s exteriors, the committee’s suggestion rests on another assumption that the situations of two areas is similar. If the committee takes no account of the difference on geography and economy in the two areas, his suggestion is still assailable. It is likely possible that Brookville is a seashore city and its economic backbone is mainly the tourism, then it is rational to enhance its property values through restrictions on landscaped yards and pointed building appearances; on the other hand, if the Deerhaven Acres is located among mountains and its economic artery is factory and agriculture, maybe improving the environment of investment and absorbing immigrant rather than taking restrictions on building are effective measures to raise estates values.

Even if the situation between Brookville and Deerhaven is similar and it is an effective way for them to take on restriction for the promotion of real values, the committee’s suggestion is also based on other assumption on the time factor. It is totally possible that the atmosphere today is distinct form seven years before, maybe the whole country including Brookville and Deerhaven was on the economical depression, but now the country is on the heyday, maybe inhabitants in Brookville had been inclined to uniform appearance of house seven years ago, but now residents in Deerhaven prefer to multi-colored and individual style on their houses. So on today in Deerhaven, it is clear that to simply go on the measure of restrictions will also restrict residents’ desires to purchase local houses, let alone to increase real values. If the committee in Deerhaven cannot take into account of times difference, the suggestion is vulnerable too. 此段开头可否稍改一下，开头加一个furthermore, 如何？ 这样略显僵硬

In sum, from above discussion, the committee’s suggestion is full of logical flaws as it stands. To strengthen it, the committee should provide more evidences to illuminate that the measure of restrictions is the main reason to increase real values in Brookville. To better evaluate it, the committee should rule out those differences of geography and time between two areas.