昊 天 翱 龙

TOPIC: ARGUMENT225 - The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

"During her three years in office, Governor Riedeburg has shown herself to be a worthy leader. Since she took office, crime has decreased, the number of jobs created per year has doubled, and the number of people choosing to live in our state has increased. These trends are likely to continue if she is reelected. In addition, Ms. Riedeburg has promised to take steps to keep big companies here, thereby providing jobs for any new residents. Anyone who looks at Ms. Riedeburg's record can tell that she is the best-qualified candidate for governor."
WORDS: 475          TIME: 00:29:07          DATE: 2008-03-31 14:55:39

The editor of the local newspaper recommend Riedeburg to be reelected as the governor for the following reasons: During her tenure, crime rate has decreased while the number of jobs created per year has doubled and more and more people choose to live in their state. Furthermore, Ms. Riedeburg has promised to take steps to keep big companyies to ensure employment for the new residents. However, after taking a scrutiny of the author's logical reasoning, I find his judgement unconvincing.

To begin with, the author attributes the decline of crime rate and the increase of vocational postitions to Reideburg's effective measures, which lacks sufficient evidence. It is merely possible that these results are caused by a series of affirmative measures taken by other departments that have nothing to do with Riedeburg. It is also likely that the number of unemployed people are increasing as well as the number of jobs created.

Secondly, the editor asserts the rising number of people of choosing to live in their state is due to Riedeburg's contributions, which is also unconvincing. It is entirely possible that people choose to live there mainly for the reason that the climate of the state is very enjoying, or the living costs and consuming standards are lower than other states. Besides, the author's assertion bases on the assumption that the increasing number of local residents is a good symbol of development. He surely overlooks the negative points that may be brought by a larger population, such as unemployment, traffic jams, and so forth.

Thirdly, the editor's contention that the promise to take steps to keep big companies can provide jobs for new residents is unwarranted. There is no evidence that big companies can create new positions for residents. Even assuming that big companies can create new jobs, there is no evidence that the positions are occupied by local residents. It is likely that workers living in neighbouring states are selected for the new vocations.

Last, the author claims that Riedeburg is the best-qualified candidate on the assumption that she does well in her tenure. But the author should take into account that there may be a candidate who is better-qualified than Riedeburg, and he or she will bring more potential profits to the state than Riedeburg will.
To sum up, the auther's recommendation of Riedeburg to be reelected as the local governor is flawed. To strengh his statement, the author should provide more evidence that: (1)It is Riedeburg's policies that contribute to the decrease of crime and increased of jobs created per year (2)The increasing number of people choose to live in the state is due to Riedeburg's credit, and it brings little negative influence (3)The big companies that Riedeburg make promises to keep here can ensure to provide jobs to new residents (4)Other candidates are less qualified than Riedeburg in a general view.