Argument214 寄托4人组 8-27

bridgewalkerUID：208595

Argument214: 383 words   30 minutes
In each city in the region of Treehaven, the majority of the money spent on government-run public school education comes from taxes that each city government collects. The region's cities differ, however, in the value they place on public education. For example, Parson City typically budgets twice as much money per year as Blue City does for its public schools—even though both cities have about the same number of residents. It seems clear, therefore, that Parson City residents care more about public school education than do Blue City residents.
---------------------------------------------------
In this argument, according the yearly budget of money spent for public schools, the speaker suggests that Parson City (PC) residents care more about public school education in comparison with Blue City (BC). Although it sounds reasonable at the first glance, a careful analysis reveals several critical flaws that severely undermine the validity of speaker's reasoning.

To begin with, the speaker mistakenly relies on the assumption that same number of residents equates same amount of taxes. Although both PC and BC have about the same number of residents, it does not follow that they pay the same amount of money. In the first place, the speaker fails to take into account that not all residents have the obligation to pay taxes. For instance, children and retirees don't have to do that. In the second place, the speaker also fails to consider the different income levels between the two cities. If economy at PC is better than BC, PC's taxpayers would more likely have a higher income than their counterparts at BC, and consequently contribute more money to the government.

Moreover, given that the two cities have the same number of taxpayers and they generate the same amount of revenue per year, the assertion that PC's residents are more care about their public education is questionable. Although PC government allocates more money for its public schools, the speaker has not demonstrated that both cities' infrastructure of public schools are the same. It is quite possible that the BC already has enough schools for its children; hence large amount of money is unnecessary. On the contrary, perhaps PC's public school buildings and facilities might be too old to meet the present needs, thus the government has to use more money to renew and replace them.

In addition, the speaker unfairly assumes that residents' attitude toward public school education can be represented the taxes they paid. Experience tells us that tax laws which regulate how much money residents should pay are established and enacted by the government not the citizens. And the government's budget plan is also cannot represent citizens' willingness. As a result, the amount of money spent by government on its public school education might have nothing to do with its residents.

In conclusion, the argument is unpersuasive according to the flaws listed above.

这篇写得很不顺啊！感觉可说的很多，但写着写着就混乱了。B2的论证好像还不对头！
大家帮忙看看。尤其是提纲！

meautoUID：2116250

I'm coming~

meautoUID：2116250

In this argument, according the yearly budget of money spent for public schools, the speaker suggests that Parson City (PC) residents care more about public school education in comparison with Blue City (BC). Although it sounds reasonable at the first glance,it seems…at first glance a careful analysis reveals several critical flaws that severely undermine the validity of speaker's reasoning.
从时间上来考虑，还可以再压缩，一句话说他的结论。一句话说结论不足信。
To begin with, the speaker mistakenly relies on the assumption that same number of residents equates same amount of taxes. Although both PC and BC have about the same number of residents, it does not follow that they pay the same amount of money. In the first place, the speaker fails to take into account that not all residents have the obligation to pay taxes.这一点攻击的没谱，两个城市都存在这个问题。 For instance, children and retirees don't have to do that. In the second place, the speaker also fails to consider the different income levels between the two cities. If economy at PC is better than BC, PC's taxpayers would more likely have a higher income than their counterparts at BC, and consequently contribute more money to the government.

Moreover, given that the two cities have the same number of taxpayers and they generate the same amount of revenue per year, the assertion that PC's residents are more care about their public education is questionable. Although PC government allocates more money for its public schools, the speaker has not demonstrated that both cities' infrastructure这个词是指桥梁道路啥的好像 of public schools are the same. It is quite possible that the BC already has enough schools for its children; hence large amount of money is unnecessary. On the contrary, perhaps PC's public school buildings and facilities might be too old to meet the present needs, thus the government has to use more money to renew and replace them.

In addition, the speaker unfairly assumes that residents' attitude toward public school education can be represented the taxes they paid. Experience tells us that tax laws which regulate how much money residents should pay are established and enacted by the government not the citizens. And the government's budget plan is also cannot represent citizens' willingness. As a result, the amount of money spent by government on its public school education might have nothing to do with its residents.
你想说缴税 多少是法律规定的，而政府怎样拨款和人民的意愿无关。可以，不过不是很明显的错误。
In conclusion, the argument is unpersuasive according to the flaws listed above.

攻击的还可以，我给你改进下：

1，        两地的收入可能不同。P预算4块，B预算2块。而总税收P40块，B4块。这能说P比B更关心教育么？
2，        假使P的PERCENTAGE比B高，这也不说明问题。两地居民人书相同。人口结构可能不同。B都住的老年人，需要接受教育的学生人少。或者B的教育条件原本就很好，硬件，老师，等等。没必要搞这大的投资。
3，        假使BP需要相同，也不表示人民不重视
甲，        政府怎样拨款和人民的意愿无关
乙，        公司和组织的捐款弥补了PB拨款差距

bridgewalkerUID：208595

谢谢！

1，两地的收入可能不同。P预算4块，B预算2块。而总税收P40块，B4块。这能说P比B更关心教育么？

这个还不知道怎么表达，汗！我去找找~

第3点可以加个可能性：B人个人捐，不通过税收！