argumnent17 cracking 小组第6次作业

jiaojiao529UID: 2268889

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 $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

The author recommends that the walnut grove town should owned EZ to collect rabbish for them. To support this claim the author provide evidence that EZ collects trash twice a week, whike ABC collects only once. He or she also cites a survey in which 80 percent of respondents to last year’s town agreed that they were satisfied with EZ’s performance. This argument rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

A threshold assumption upon which the recommendation relies is that town concil has chose ABC instead of EZ only because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from 2000 to 2500 a month, where as ABC’s fee still 2000. The author fails to consider other possible fasctors may cause the town concil has chose ABC. Such factors may include that ABD adopt new technologh to dual with trash, in that matter, they can bring about little pollution and some trash may be recycled back for reuse. While the EZ still use the old technology to bury trash, as a result they cause serious pollution. In this matter, even ABC should be paid more, the gover still chose it to service, because the factor help the gover make dicision is little to do with money.

The author fails to explain the reasons EZ rise their price which may cause the residents questionable to the EZ company. In this argument, we find no information about how is EZ’s service before thay rise their price. It is entirely possible that EZ provide the same service: they collects trash twice a week, however, they did not inprove their service but rise the price. In this matter, the residents may think this implentment is unacceptable. Furthermore, even ABC collets trash only once a week, they cleaned great and can keep there clean during a week. So the gover would like to chose ABC for service.

Finally, the mere fact that EZ cerrenly has a fleet of 20 trucks has ordered additional trucks lends little support the this conclusion. May be these trucks are not all for collect trash or EZ has other business, these trucks collect trash for other towns. The survey which showed that 80 percent of repondents agreed that they were satisfied with EZ is open to doubt. In general, samples for the survey should be able to represent all residents. However, from the survey quoted in this argument, we find no sign of such procedures for random samplings, and have good reasons to doubt if the sample is representative enough altitude of residents as a whole.

In conclusion, to pursuade me that the gover should choose EZ to collect trash for them the author must supply clear evidence that the EZ provede better service than ABC, and their high price is worthwhile. The author must provide evidence that the money, not same other factor, was reponsible for the gover to make decision about which companies should be piked up to collect trash for the town.


[ 本帖最后由 jiaojiao529 于 2007-2-7 09:19 编辑 ]

nostrumUID: 2124189

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-208286-1-1.html

请修改格式

jiaojiao529UID: 2268889

改过了 谢谢斑竹