argument117...sally组作业..必回拍

foreveraUID: 202035

TOPIC: ARGUMENT 117 - The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.

"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores."
WORDS: 463          TIME: 上午 12:50:22          DATE: 2006-2-15

In the argument, by providing the result of a recent survey and its pertinent ratiocination, the  author intends to claim  that the changed sales of home office machines and office supplies would make their office supply departments to be the most profitable component of the stores. The logic of the author seems to be reasonable, but in-depth scrutiny upon the evidence he offers reveals some severe fallacies the argument suffers.

First and foremost, the result of the survey is not so convincing as it seems for  the author fails to have comprehensive coverage of the people who join in the survey.  It is entirely possible that most part of the survey participators join in the survey but make no response. Perhaps, the workers are not experiencing any changes of their working method, or even the works allowed to take back home decrease reversely. Thus, the ostensively persuasive data- over 70 percent, which lies to be the premise of the argument , is not able to stand for reality whether the workers take more word back home or not. Under this circumstance, without steady fundation, the suggestions and predictions of the author would not make any sense.

What is more, even grant the survey is worth trusting, the author does not provide enough information to substaniate the point that such work-at-home trend would make great demand of home office machines and office supplies. It can not be ruled out the possiblity that most of working-at-home workers are not doing the jobs relating to such office machines, such as handicraft works, carpentry and so forth. Or perhaps, these workers already have printers alike of their own which need not to be replaced by new ones.  In this sense, the sales of such machines and office supplies would not possibly increase as the way that the author has imagined.

Finally, whether the changes of sales would definitely lead to increasing profit is still open to doubt. As common sense, the profit of a sale should be the balance of income it brings subtracted by its cost. On one hand, the author might ignore the fact that the increasing supply would result in a droping price of the product. On the other hand, perhaps some corresponding cost of office sales keeps at a high level and it will not be inclined to decrease with advancing sales. So, if the cost of home office machines and office supplies is no less than its income, the ultimate result from the changed sales would turn out to be a total failure.

To sum up, based on incomprehensive analysis, the argument has little reference for the store keepers to make their future decisions. And to better improve this argument, the author needs to offer detailed information on all the points above.