Argument237=美丽G程小组=小组2月5日作业by独行天下

逆风的船UID: 2724552

TOPIC: ARGUMENT237 - The following appeared as part of an article in a local Beauville newspaper.

"According to a government report, last year the city of Dillton reduced its corporate tax rate by 15 percent; at the same time, it began offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities to any company that would relocate to Dillton. Within 18 months, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton, where they employ a total of 300 people. Therefore, the fastest way for Beauville to stimulate economic development and hence reduce unemployment is to provide tax incentives and other financial inducements that encourage private companies to relocate here."
WORDS: 348
TIME: 上午 12:25:32
DATE: 2010-1-12


The author asserts the only way for the Beucille(B) to develop its economy and increase its employment rate is to introduce some private companies and imitate the deed of the Dillton(D), which absurd 18 companies to its city through many financial methods. Seemingly reasonable as the argument is, there is some flaws required further consideration.

To begin with, the 18 companies relocated in the D city may not the result of the financial policy of it, such as offering relocation grants and favorable rates on the cities utilities, it is entirely possible the result of the other factors, such as the technological schools located in the D, or D city produces the raw materials for the factories relocated in this are. Further more, the mere fact that the companies relocated in the D city employed a total of 300 people can not indicate that the employment rate of the D has increased for we did not get the information of the total people of the D city.

Even the 18 companies related in the S city was due to the financial policy enforced by the government of this city, and the employment rate indeed increased after this event, I still can not be convinced that the B city can imitate the D city. Maybe the B city and the D city are located in two distinct with different climate, or do not share the same source and something alike. As the concerns mentioned above, the method for the D city can not be transported into the B city. More over, the author did not mention weather the companies relocated in the D city are private ones, so there is no evidence to guarantee that the economy of the B city can be profited by introducing some private companies. It is entirely possible that the collected companies vary from the private ones in many aspects; in this concern the private companies introduced to the B city may not play the desired roles.

As all mentioned above, the logic of the author grounded in this argument is open to doubt. To make a convincible conclusion, the author should consider the real impact of the financial policy of the D city on the companies relocated there, and the function of the companies relocated in the D city, as well as the difference and the similarity of the two cities.