Argument192 求互拍

G10T5UID: 2101393

Argument192  第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：29分34秒     492 words
从2005年7月10日14时51分到2005年7月10日15时29分
------题目------
The following is a letter to the editor of the Roseville Gazette.
'Despite opposition from some residents of West Roseville, the arguments in favor of merging the townships of Roseville and West Roseville are overwhelming. First, residents in both townships are confused about which authority to contact when they need a service; for example, the police department in Roseville receives many calls from residents of West Roseville. This sort of confusion would be eliminated with the merger. Second, the savings in administrative costs would be enormous, since services would no longer be duplicated: we would have only one fire chief, one tax department, one mayor, and so on. And no jobs in city government would be lost—employees could simply be reassigned. Most importantly, the merger will undoubtedly attract business investments as it did when the townships of Hamden and North Hamden merged ten years ago.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer suggests that West Roseville and Roseville should merge their townships. To support this assertion, the arguer cites some arguments as evidence that merging would eliminate confusion, reduce administrative costs, and even attract more business investments. At the first glance, this argument seems to be reasonable. But some logical errors render it unconvincing.

First of all, whether the merging would really eliminate confusion is not clear from the argument. The arguer cites an example that Roseville's police department receives many calls from residents of West Roseville as evidence for his or her conclusion. But after the merging, the population of the new city would is bigger than that of Roseville and West Roseville. So we cannot merge Roseville's police department and West Roseville's police department into a single one even after the merging. The result is that current confusion would still exist.

In addition, the arguer fails to provide strong evidence that the administrative costs would be enormous. Just as mentioned above, while the current governments of these two cities only need concentrate on their own affairs, the new governments should deal with more affairs with the increasing of population. So even though we only have one fire chief, one tax department, the employees in these new departments would increase which seriously counteract the benefits brought about by the merging. In fact, the arguer also implies this point of view. To illustrate that no jobs in city government would be lost, the arguer says that these additional employees could simply be reassigned. But do we have so many positions to arrange them? Maybe the best way is to find new positions for them inside the government. So if now each of Roseville and West Roseville has one mayor and three vice mayors, there would be one mayor and seven vice mayors in the new government. Under this circumstance, our administrative costs would remain the same.

What is more, the arguer's assertion that merging would attract more business investments is totally based on the merging between Hamden and North Hamden ten years ago. Although the increasing of business investments after the merging of those cities is the fact, the arguer cannot give any evidence to show that this economic merit is caused by merging. And even we grant that, the arguer also does not provide any comparison between this two merging. It is highly possible that the advantages and disadvantages of Roseville and West Roseville are the same, and then merging them would not bring any new merits to Roseville and West Roseville, and provide new chance to overcome their current defects.

In sum, the arguer's assertion is unwarranted. If the arguer wants to lend his or her argument more power, he or she should mention that the new government could direct its residents to call a nearer police but not the further one and greatly improve its employees’ efficiency, and the new city appears more attractive to investors.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-10 at 19:32 ]

cityriversonUID: 2119340

In this argument, the arguer suggests that West Roseville and Roseville should merge their townships. To support this assertion, the arguer cites some arguments这个词感觉不好 as evidence that merging would eliminate confusion, reduce administrative costs, and even attract more business investments. At the first glance, this argument seems to be reasonable. But some logical errors render it unconvincing.

First of all, whether the merging would really eliminate confusion is not clear from the argument. The arguer cites an example that Roseville's police department receives many calls from residents of West Roseville as evidence for his or her conclusion. But after the merging, the population of the new city would is bigger than that of Roseville and West Roseville. So we cannot merge Roseville's police department and West Roseville's police department into a single one even after the merging. The result is that current confusion would still exist.这段的论证感觉牵强，可不可以说merging不是解决这种问题的唯一方法，也不是最好的？

In addition, the arguer fails to provide strong evidence that the administrative costs would be enormous. TS你想说的意思是花费的节省可能没有那么多吧？少了一个saving？Just as mentioned above, while the current governments of these two cities only need concentrate on their own affairs, the new governments should deal with more affairs with the increasing of population. So even though we only have one fire chief, one tax department, the employees in these new departments would increase which seriously counteract the benefits brought about by the merging. In fact, the arguer also implies this point of view. To illustrate that no jobs in city government would be lost, the arguer says that these additional employees could simply be reassigned. But do we have so many positions to arrange them? Maybe the best way is to find new positions for them inside the government. So if now each of Roseville and West Roseville has one mayor and three vice mayors, there would be one mayor and seven vice mayors in the new government. Under this circumstance, our administrative costs would remain the same.

What is more, the arguer's assertion that merging would attract more business investments is totally based on the merging between Hamden and North Hamden ten years ago.直接说错误类比是不是好一些？太冗长了感觉 Although the increasing of business investments after the merging of those cities is the fact, the arguer cannot give any evidence to show that this economic merit is caused by merging. 展开一下？这也是一点And even we grant that, the arguer also does not provide any comparison between this two merging. It is highly possible that the advantages and disadvantages of Roseville and West Roseville are the same, and then merging them would not bring any new merits to Roseville and West Roseville, and provide new chance to overcome their current defects.

In sum, the arguer's assertion is unwarranted. If the arguer wants to lend his or her argument more power, he or she should mention that the new government could direct its residents to call a nearer police but not the further one and greatly improve its employees’ efficiency, and the new city appears more attractive to investors.


总体挺好的，错误点基本上都挑出来了
论述的也挺充分
只是有时候感觉有些地方不简练

看你的时间倒是刚好
不知道检查了没有，注意避免一些不应该的错误

好羡慕你能写这么多
我限时的时候只能写到400字左右:(