argument185 飞越dreams小组第4次作业

gre_killer_wuUID: 2451830

argument185 飞越dreams小组第4次作业 by gre_killer_wu

Argument 185
The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager.

"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."

字数：387

Before concluding that a restriction in water pressure will increase the company’s profits, the pressure-restriction policy itself should be considered from several other angles. It seems that the author reaches the conclusion hastily without considering other respects of expenditure saving and some possible results caused by a low water pressure.

First of all, a restriction in water pressure, does not necessarily result in a decrease in water consumption. The quantity of water consumed in bathes, is determined both by the water pressure and by the time people use it. A powerful spout of water may sluice the sweat and dirt on the body effectively, thus short the time consumed in a bath. However, after the adjustment, the spout from the showerheads may be less effective in washing people’s bodies, thus a relative longer time is possibly took for people to wash themselves. Without any actual readings of water usage before and after the restriction, the assertion about a decrease in water usage is unconvincing.

Even if the restriction can reduce the water consumption, the expenditure saved from the adjustment may be insignificant to the total cost in the tower maintain. The expenditure took in the tower maintain, is constituted by varieties of fees, such as the manager cost, the payment for hiring workers who clean the tower, the electricity fees, and the cost took in repairing the damage in lights, wire lines, water pipes. Perhaps the expenditure of water consumption accounts only an insignificantly small part of all these cost. If so, the restriction will contribute little to the expenditure saving.

The author also ignores the possible adverse results from the restriction. People prefer to live in convenience and comfort in generally. A strong enough water pressure of a showerhead, assures people’s comfort in the bathes.  Low water pressures in showerheads, possibly makes many residents in the tower less comfortable than before. In fact, admitted by the author, a few complaints have been reported, just during a month after the restriction. They may just complain about it at first and consider moving to other houses after a longer period. Thus, a possible reduction in the clients will decrease the company’s revenue and proof the awfulness of the restriction policy.

In conclusion, the restriction policy should be pondered in all aspects. But the author fails to do that.