argument17 [四海一家]第二次作业 恳请猛拍

aiduduUID: 2264857

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: 557         TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-2-3

In this argument, the arguer suggests that Walnut Grove's citizen should continue using EZ Disposal rather than ABC Waste, even though EZ raised its monthly fee recently. To justify this claim, the arguer provides the evidence that EZ collect trash twice a week and it has ordered additional trucks. In addition he cites the survey to show that people are satisfied with EZ's performance. A careful examination of the argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

To begin with, the premise of the conclusion is unreasonable and unfair. It assumes that ABC is not able to provide the service as good as EZ. There is sufficient information about ABC in the argument. It only tells us that ABC collects trash once a week and it cost less. But we do not know other vital information about it, for example: its credibility and the machines that they use to collect and deal with trash. The citizens in Walnut Grove town may know ABC little as well, because they use EZ for the past ten years. They do not have the chance to know the whole story of ABC for they have not any idea about its service. It is unfair to force them to continue using EZ which cost them more.

In addition, the arguer provides the evidences which are weaken to support his conclusion. First, he tells us EZ collect trash twice a week, while ABC collects trash once a week. We do not know the ways they collect trash and the amount they collect each time. Maybe it is enough to collect trash once a week. It is a waste for the residents, even though they only pay 20% extra fee to the 50% extra service. Additionally, the additional trucks' using is not explained exactly. EZ may develop their business in another town. As a result, the additional trucks will not used to improve the service in Walnut Grove. Even they will be used in Walnut Grove, it may not be necessary. If there are enough trucks available, the additional ones are waste of money and will cause more pollution. Besides, the survey that the arguer cites to show the citizen’s satisfactory does not provide us more convincing information. The sample of the survey may not be representative. The people who attend the survey may occasionally be chosen from the people who like EZ. There is no details that indicate they are willing to pay 25% extra fee for such satisfaction.

Finally, the arguer make the hasty conclusion without collection enough information. The argument overlooks the reason that EZ improve the monthly fee. It is possible that EZ does not suffer the pressure of the competition because it gets the ten-year contract. Consequently, there is no need to provide the more reasonable price for them to serve the town. At the same time, it should be consider the financial ability of the Walnut Grove’s town council to take the higher monthly fee. If the local government has a more emergent project to use a large amount of money, it may not have more money to pay for EZ.

In sum, it is unreasonable and unfair to request the local council accept the trash disposal service at higher price. In order to convince people, the arguer should provide more information about the reason EZ improves monthly fee, the future service of EZ and the need of the local residents.

很多语言表达自己觉得不地道，但是又不知怎么改。希望能得到指正。谢谢