Argument117 v6 8.19

kobestrongUID: 2117374

Argument117
The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores．"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its　office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of thiwork-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the  stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paperhredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores."
________________________________________________________

In this memo, the manager recommends the Value-Mart store should increase the stock of home office machines and supplies because a survey shows that the workers are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than before, and the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of the stores. However, in my view, the manager's contention is ill-grounded.

To begin with, the representative of the survey is dubious. The manager fails to support any information about the base amount of the respondents, and if the number of the respondents is very tiny, the survey is with no sense. In addition, we are not informed with the scope of this survey covering. It is entirely possible that the respondents do not live in the range of the store and even if they need to buy any office-supplies, they would not go to the Valu-Mart stores. What's more, the manager overlooks the careers of these respondents. In fact, the office-supplies may not be in need even if the workers have to take them home. Thus, without these information, the survey could not convince me.

Secondly, even if the survey is convincing, the manager lacks evidence about whether the trend of the taking-work-home will continues. For that matter, it is entirely possible that after the workers' complaining, the employers may stop this requirement, and workers no longer need to work at home; or perhaps, it is just a season plan of the companies, and the taking-work-home will not exist very soon. Not consider these scenarios, the manager could not hastily expect profits of office-supplies.

Thirdly, the manager's contention rests on the fact that the Value-Mart stores are lack of the stock of the office-supplies. However, the manager did not mention any information about it. It is entirely possible that there are sufficient stock in the stores which are enough to satisfy the demand of the consumers if they really need to buy the stuffs, and the increasing of the stock may just be a waste.

Finally, even the manager could substantiate the foregoing assumptions, he still could not convince me with the conclusion that the office-supply departments in the stores will be the most profitable component. In fact, the manager even mentions nothing about other departments' sale, and it is almost impossible to compare the profits of office-supply department with others'.

In conclusion, the manager's contention bases on false logics. We still need more convincing evident and information to evaluate the argument.

hustzwjUID: 203387

我来看看！

hustzwjUID: 203387

漏掉的几个点！
是否有同行的竞争？－－增加stock不意味着顾客都会来◎
无故结论－－－we will also increase office supplies。。
对于all。。这一点可以归到survey里！

kobestrongUID: 2117374

嗯 对对 只要是关于赚钱的都要考虑竞争~!!

夜一UID: 2130338

感觉在结构上，大家都比较倾向于先去分析那个调查
难道是我的想法太奇怪了么？我总觉得应该先去反驳那个用带回家的工作增加导致家用办公设备需求增加的问题，觉得这才是最重要的吧
我还是新手啦，虽然马上就要考了，今天却还是第一次写argument
不知道是不是我的想法有问题
我的文章：
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1
后面附的有提纲
嗯，大家互相讨论一下吧，我一直对于结构这个问题很费解