argument17 076gmyth小组第四次作业 拍死!

杏林有情天UID: 2247728

TOPIC: ARGUMENT17 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."
WORDS: 475          TIME: 上午 12:30:00          DATE: 2006-10-27

The arguer recommends that Walnut Grove should continue to contract with EZ Disposal, which had serviced for it over past ten years, rather than ABC Waste the residents did not understand it ever. The arguer cites that although EZ Disposal requires more $500 than ABC Waste does,it supplies service twice a week whereas ABC Waste only clean trash once a week.And the arguer points out that , EZ orders a fleet of 20 trucks,nevertheless,ABC just has current trucks as EZ used to. Finally, the arguer also provides a survey that the result is that most respondents were satisfied with EZ's performance.As I observe,the arguer fails to supply convincing evidence to support this recommendation.

Firstly, the arguer fails to rule out specific information to convince us that W.G must need twice trash collection a week, one collection is not enough to clean the environment of W.G. Perhaps,residents of W.G have already considered that twice trash collection a week was not necessary,in fact,just a great waste of money, time and labour force. So one service supplyed by ABC would be proper to achieve the residents’ requirement.

Secondly, ordering 20 trucks supplys little support to the assurance that EZ would provide exceptional service.Perhaps EZ is desired to expend its service bussiness to other towns, so it  need to enlarge the number of  trucks . Even if the former assumption is not true,the arguer cites no evidence to prove that EZ really add to current trucks servicing for W.G so that enhance the quality of service. It would plan to explore transportation bussiness for enhancing its profits.

Additionally, the mere fact that 80% respondents to last year's survey were satisfied with EZ's service provides little support to the arguer's recommendation. The arguer fails to prove that the respondents could really represent allover residents serviced by EZ. Maybe there are a few residents respond on this survey,even and only  residents satisfied EZ's performance were willing to respond this survey. There is no specific information to increase the convince of this survey.

Last but not least,the arguer rules out no evidence to find out the reason why EZ enhanced its monthly free.Perhaps it meets finance crash because of its disorder management , which not only is harmful to it but also to its customers. or perhaps over past ten years no comparison leads it to outweigh its value in W.G, causing the increasing free for that it considers it is the only welcomed trash service company in W.G.

In sum, until the arguer supplys convincing evidence to prove that choosing EZ would bring about better service to W.G, we could never ensure that continuely contracting with EZ would obtain more benefits than choosing ABC or any other trash service companies. Furthermore,the arguer must rule our the evidence could prove that most residents feel satisfied with EZ,and government are willing to afford for the additional free , while maybe these money is proble to solve immediate problems.
申明开头参考了北美模版，比较相同，正在建设模板中，所以开头较同，其他原创！