argument17[Jet小组]第二次作业

月亮熬的汤UID: 2382325

17.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 $2000to $2500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2000. 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.

字数：363
The author recommends to continue using EZ for trash collection services in Walnut Grove instead of swithching to ABC Waste. To support his recommendation, he points out EZ collects trash more frenquently than ABC and EZ will buy more trucks. In addition, the author cites a survey to show that the majority of citizens are satisfied with EZ's work. However, examing this argument carefully, we will find out how groundless it is.

To begin with, the author argues that EZ's performance is better than ABC's for the reason that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC only once. This conclusion is entirely unreasonable. Higher frequency doesn't simply stands for better service. It is greatly possible that although ABC only collects trash once a week but it collects with great patience and carefulness while EZ collects halfheartedly and cursorily. So citizens of Walnut Grove town will benefit more from ABC's service.

Meanwhile, the author cites that EZ has ordered additional trucks, but he fails to provide any evidence that those additional trucks are used to collect trashes. May EZ used them to develop other services. Even if these trucks are for trash collection, we still can not deduce that these trucks will provide service for citizens in Walnut Grove. It is entirly possible that EZ wants to expand its range of service and collect trash for districts around Walnut Grove. In that case, citizens in Walnut Grove will benefit nothing from EZ's additional trucks, they should choose ABC for its cheaper service.

Finally, the author provides no assurances that the survey mentioned in the letter is dependable. He fails to inform us how many people are surveyed and how many people respond. Maybe only ten people are surveyed and only five people respond, then according to the percentage in the letter, only 4 people in that town are satisfied with EZ's performance, the validity of this survey is seriously doubtful.

In conclusion, it is unreasonable for the author for recommending that Walnut Grove town should continue using EZ and what he cites to support his assertion are totally unpersuasive. To enhance this argument, the author should at least provide necessary information mentioned above.