A10 - xymelody

XYmelodyUID: 2337706

A10

In this argument, the arguer reaches the conclusion that the Batavia government should regulate milk prices in order to prevent farmers' excessive profits and ensure both lower prices and adequate supply of milk. To support this claim, the arguer cites the following facts: (1) the number of dairy farms throughout the country is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago; (2) the price of milk at the local Excello Food Market has increased from $1.50 to over $3.00 per gallon during the last 10 years. However, none of the evidences can support the conclusion creditability.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that there is an apparently increased supply of milk, which bases on the statistic that the number of dairy farms throughout the country is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago. Firstly, the increase percentage that achieved by the survey throughout the country can't lead to an assumption that the number of farms in Batavia has increased with the same percentage during the last decade. It's very possible that the number is just the same, or even decreases. Even if the number of farms has increased during the last 10 years, there isn't convincing proof to support the assumption. The arguer provides none evidence to establish a causal relationship between the increase of the number of dairy farms and the increase of the supply of milk. It's possible that the farms focus on some other product rather than milk, which result in a decrease in the milk's supply.

In the second place, the arguer unwarrantedly claims the farms are receiving excessive profits. The fact that the price of milk increased from $1.50 from $3.00 in local Excello Food Market, which the arguer cites to reach the assumption, can do little to prove the average price of milk in Batavia increased rapidly. If the price of milk in some other local markets hasn't increased so much, or even becomes cheaper, which is possible with regard of the facts provided by the arguer, the average price may haven’t increased very much. Even if the price has increased to $3.00, the arguer can't convince us that the profits are excessive. If the cost of milk has also increased; the price level has also increased; the demand of the milk has rapidly decreased, then the profits possibly are modest.

In the third place, ignoring the negative effects of government regulation on the supply, the arguer assumes the regulation can ensure the adequate supply of milk. If the government regulates the milk market by controlling the price, the common sense tells us the producer will reduce the supply of milk and devote more attention to some other product to response the decrease of profit in milk supply, which will result in an insufficient supply.

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer must present more facts to demonstrate that the farmers are receiving excessive profits. To solidify the argument, we also have to know more details on the relationship between government regulation and the supply.