The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting the supply of new housing, could lead to significant increases in the price of housing in the county. Proponents of the measure note that Chestnut County established a similar measure ten years ago, and its housing prices have increased only modestly since. However, opponents of the measure note that Pine County adopted restrictions on the development of new residential housing fifteen years ago, and its housing prices have since more than doubled. The council currently predicts that the proposed measure, if passed, will result in a significant increase in housing prices in Maple County.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.
The stated argument concludes that the price of houses in the Maple County will significantly increase if curbs are imposed on supply of land for new housing in order to slower the pace of development of the county. This assertion however is based upon the results of a similar scheme in another county, which makes creates certain flaws in the central argument that cannot be overlooked.
The aim of the city council is to take certain measures with regard to their concern that the Maple County is being overdeveloped. It is stated that they decide to import restrictions on supply of new housing do slower the pace of land development. This assumption that slower pace of housing development will prevent overdevelopment might be true but it may also create a situation in which the real estate of the country gets adversely affected. Imposing such restrictions will put future projects on hold and schemes which are already under construction will suffer huge losses. This might cause dissatisfaction among the builders as well as those who have got their money invested in those schemes. Such a situation leads to another factor that causes the builders to hike prices in order to express their opposition to the implemented policies.
In order to support their claims, the proponents of these policies from the city council take the reference of Chestnut county. It is stated that chestnut county members had implemented similar policies ten years ago and the house prices in that county did not show a significant increase. It seems fairly unreasonable to compare the data of another county that too one which had faced such a situation ten years ago. Ten years mark a huge gap in the factors that influence the administrative policies of a county. Also, It might be the case that the costs that affect the house pricing are drastically different in both the places. The modest increase of Chestnut may be attributed to the already suffering real-estate market then.
Like in case of every administrative policy, this one too had opponents. The members of the council that opposed this policy cited the data of Pine county which faced a similar scenario. Fifteen years ago, Pine council members had seen significant growth in house prices on implementation of similar rules. Just as in the case of Chestnut, comparing the outcomes of some other county with the one in discussion is unjust. Fifteen years mark an even greater time gap for such comparisons. The situation of Maple County now and that of Pine County then may me completely different. The surge in house pricing there, does not create a universal law that becomes applicable at each and every situation that creates similar outcomes.
The fundamentals of Economics include the ‘Law of Demand’ which states that price of each and every economic commodity will increase if their supply is curbed. This might have been the basis for the council members to arrive at the conclusion. But the data presented and the seemingly unfair comparisons that are taken into consideration to not lend credibility to the argument and makes it indefensible.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jenniferjack07 | 82 | view |
| 2020-01-23 | jason123 | 16 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | samramjam12345 | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-12 | nimesh94 | 55 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | cnegus | 63 | view |
- The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limi 55
- TRUE SUCCESS CAN BE MEASURED PRIMARILY IN TERMS OF GOALS ONE SETS FOR ONESELF. 54
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than 29
- CLAIM: WE USUALLY LEARN MUCH MORE FROM PEOPLE WHOSE VIEWS WE SHARE THAN THOSE WHOSE VIEWS CONTRADICT OUR OWN.REASON: DISAGREEMENT CAN CAUSE STRESS AND INHIBIT LEARNING. 62
- The following appeared in a letter from a homeowner to a friend."Of the two leading real estate firms in our town — Adams Realty and Fitch Realty — Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many 83
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 518 350
No. of Characters: 2555 1500
No. of Different Words: 230 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.771 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.932 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.697 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 182 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 81 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.583 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.986 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.417 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.281 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.481 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.062 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ation that creates similar outcomes. The fundamentals of Economics include the &...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, may, so, then, well, as well as, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 13.6137724551 184% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2616.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 518.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05019305019 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77070365392 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77880715495 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453667953668 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 830.7 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.5771634888 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.0 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5833333333 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.20833333333 5.70786347227 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163974479003 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0479899957178 0.0743258471296 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0530429589339 0.0701772020484 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0908953670259 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0326398900292 0.0628817314937 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.01 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 98.500998004 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.