The following appeared in a memo from the Mayor of the city of Hillview:
“In order to alleviate the serious unemployment problem in our town, we should encourage Autotech to build its automobile manufacturing plant in our area. The Hillview landfill, which has been undeveloped for decades, is a perfect site for this plant. The building and staffing of this plant will put to work thousands of Hillview residents left unemployed after Computech computer software programming company abandoned its national facility last year. I am asking the City Council to authorize a large campaign to attract the company and offer significant tax incentives to make our town attractive to this giant of car manufacturing.”
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation 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 recommendation.
The Mayor of Hillview reaches the conclusion that Autotech should be encouraged to build a manufacturing plant in the city, and that a large campaign must be authorized to attract the company. They also consider offering significant tax incentives to make the region more attractive to the automobile giant. This argument has been made on the premise that the Hillview landfill is a perfect site for the plant, and that such measures would help ameliorate the city's unemployment problem. However, the argument fails to answer three important questions, the answers to which could drastically affect the veracity of the Mayor's logic.
First, would the construction of an automobile manufacturing plant effectively employ the people who were forced out of their jobs at Computech? It may be the case that the former employees of Computech, who were software programmers, are not adequate for employment by Autotech, which deals in automobiles. Even if there were software-related jobs at Autotech, it is possible that these programmers found jobs elsewhere, or have already moved to a different sector. Another possibility is that the jobs at Autotech pay less than those of other companies; the salaries may not be competitive. If evidence arises that any of these situations are true, then the answer to this question would be 'no.' This would damage one of the Mayor's main points, which relies on Autotech being able to employ these 'ex-employees' of Computech. Hence, the Mayor should deduce the exact answer to this question before asking the City Council to go forward with the mentioned plans.
Second, would the landfill function as a perfect site for the automobile plant? It may be possible that the area being underdeveloped would be considered as a disadvantage for the company, considering they have to build their plant from scratch. This landfill may also be too far from the city, making it less inviting to potential employees who live on the other side of the city. It may also be the case that the area around the landfill has inadequate water or electricity infrastructure, and there may be persistent bad smells arising from the age-old landfill, the contents of which have not been elaborated. The Mayor has suggested that the answer to this question is 'yes,' but fails to substantiate their response, by not providing any further evidence for their claim. Even if Autotech is likely to solve the employment problem, the location of the landfill, or the conditions of the area - may be a dealbreaker for the company.
Finally, even if the answers to the questions above are in favour of the Mayor's conclusion, would tax incentives and large campaigns be sufficient to attract Autotech to the city? The argument makes the assumption that these measures are enough, but does not consider possibilities of the answer to this question being 'no.' What if Autotech already has a manufacturing plant in a nearby city, and hence decides that building another one in close proximity is redundant? Autotech may not even have the funds necessary to build a new plant, even with tax benefits. Furthermore, it may also be the case that the automobile parts (raw materials) are too expensive at locations in and around Hillview, and that setting up a plant in this location may not be a sound plan in the long-term. Thus, answering this question is important to prove to the City Council that its efforts would not go in vain.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, fails considerably in making a persuasive case for itself. The mayor has failed to answer the aforementioned questions, and has thus not made an argument that would be convincing enough for the City Council to accept the proposal put forth. The argument should consult reliable sources, and provide evidence that effectively backs up its stated and unstated assumptions. Thus, only after such an overhaul, can the Mayor pose a valid proposal.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-12 | Technoblade | 73 | view |
| 2023-04-22 | keisham | 66 | view |
| 2022-08-30 | pallavi.singla2@gmail.com | 59 | view |
| 2021-10-13 | predatoros | 33 | view |
| 2021-10-11 | Ruffin_ | 57 | view |
- The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities Recently we signed a contract with the Fly Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our warehouse i 63
- The following appeared as part of a petition sent to residents of Youngtown by an environmental protection group The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve This sanctuary is essent 66
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations we cannot permit i 78
- 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 in any ot 58
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals In a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps a concentrated solution of UltraClean produced a 40 percent greater reduction in the bacteria population than did the 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 650 350
No. of Characters: 3199 1500
No. of Different Words: 269 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.049 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.922 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.777 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 213 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 172 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 136 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 79 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.542 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.88 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.309 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.498 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.062 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 440, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'proximity'.
Suggestion: proximity
...ce decides that building another one in close proximity is redundant? Autotech may not even hav...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, second, so, then, thus, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.6327345309 178% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.9520958084 193% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 13.6137724551 184% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 28.8173652695 167% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3279.0 2260.96107784 145% => OK
No of words: 650.0 441.139720559 147% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04461538462 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.04926703274 4.56307096286 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86295924494 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 278.0 204.123752495 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.427692307692 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1016.1 705.55239521 144% => 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: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 11.0 1.67365269461 657% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.1034977818 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.444444444 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0740740741 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.77777777778 5.70786347227 66% => OK
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 : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188836645442 0.218282227539 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0597935801953 0.0743258471296 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.046634859275 0.0701772020484 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125954802299 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.061977921132 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 138.0 98.500998004 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.