argument17 by poboso

pobosoUID: 2318913

先想好了再开始限时写的。。果然是不行。。
题目：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."
字数：409          用时：00:30:00          日期：2009-1-10 16:02:26

In this argument ,the author recommends that WG's town council should not switch from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste. The author rests his recommendation on that EZ has ordered additional trucks and it collects trash twice a week. He also cites a research to prove his conclusion. It is reasonable at the first glance. However, it can not stand further examination.
First, the number of trucks does not represent that the quality of collecting trash is better. What we concentrate on the quality of a disposal collecting is the quantity of the whole trash collecting. It depends on the quantity of every single truck and the numbers of the trucks. Unless the author rule out the possibility that EZ's average truck quantity is no less than that of ABC's truck , he is not believed to say that EZ can collect more trash than ABC.
Second, the author does not give evidence to show that the ordered trucks will soon be taken into use and be used in WG's town. The truck ordered may be applied to other areas. And the new trucks may be put into use in a long future.
Third, the times of collecting trash is not a direct index to show the quality of collecting trash. EZ can collect all the trash twice a week, but ABC can collect all the trash within one time. The unknown factors contain the average quantity of a trash truck and the efficiency of the workers .So whether EZ is better in collecting trash is unknown.
Finally, the author cites a vague research to support his view. As I see it, the research has some mistakes. He does not points out the total number of the sample. Is the sample large enough to draw a conclusion? The argument does not tell us. And we have no idea about the numbers of the respondents. Maybe more people who are unsatisfied do not respond to the research. Thus, the outcome is biased. What is more, there are still 20 percent respondents showing objection. If the council wants to satisfy everyone, it has to make further research.
In sum, the author simply draws a conclusion that the council should continue to use EZ. He reasons from the number of trucks and times of collecting every week. He does not rule out other possibilities to make his conclusion standstill. In order to make the recommendation more convincing, he has to add more evidences as mentioned above.