GRE ARGUMENT:The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper."The primary function of the Committee for a Better Oak City is to advise the city government on how to make the best use of the city's limited budget

Essay topics:

GRE ARGUMENT:
The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper.

"The primary function of the Committee for a Better Oak City is to advise the city government on how to make the best use of the city's limited budget. However, at some of our recent meetings we failed to make important decisions because of the foolish objections raised by committee members who are not even residents of Oak City. People who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot fully understand the business and politics of the city. After all, only Oak City residents pay city taxes, and therefore only residents understand how that money could best be used to improve the city. We recommend, then, that the Committee for a Better Oak City vote to restrict its membership to city residents only. We predict that, without the interference of non-residents, the committee will be able to make Oak City a better place in which to live and work."

The letter states that some committee members hider Oak City to become better since they do not live in and comprehend Oak City well. The author supports that the Committee membership should restrain to local people. This proposal might hold water; however, there might be some other reasons cause this proposal unconvincing.

First of all, the author argues that the Committee members who are not residents of Oak City do not understand Oak City. Nevertheless, there might be other methods that render non-resident committee members comprehend other city well. It is possible that they were growing up in Oak City and their families still live there. In this way, non-resident committee members might not only perceive thoroughly the history but also the current needs of Oak City.

Secondly, the letter contends that failing to reach essential consensus since the objection came from the non-resident committee members who lack knowledge of Oak City of. Notwithstanding, members who disagree some decision do not represent they are not wise or not understand residents' needs. They might have their reasons to oppose the decisions. For instance, they might evaluate the long term profits and then find out a decision might benefit this generation but harm the next generation. Then, some people who desire for current interest might recognize that the opposite committee hider Oak City to earn profit.

Finally, the author cites that sole Oak City residents who pay city taxes and then concern about the budget going. Nonetheless, there might be other causes that render people concern Oak City. For example, people who work in Oak City might also concern about the prosperity of Oak City since there is where their salaries come from. If the economy of Oak City is impoverished, they might not have their jobs and salaries in Oak City. Therefore, the non-resident committee members might concern the economy of Oak City as much important as residents.

Although the author provides several points to support the proposal, the opposite committee members might have their reasons to vote against. The proposal should not be accepted until the more information of non-resident committee members and details about the decisions which mentioned in the letter have been supplied.

Votes
Average: 6 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2019-12-05 pooja.kakde@gmail.com 69 view
2018-10-31 york13468 66 view
2018-10-20 Shrinivaschavhan0029 77 view
2018-06-09 dshah6611 77 view
2017-07-27 roncy view
Essay Categories
Essays by user ing54007 :

Comments

Let's analyze the structure of the statement :

condition 1:
The primary function of the Committee for a Better Oak City is to advise the city government on how to make the best use of the city's limited budget. However, at some of our recent meetings we failed to make important decisions because of the foolish objections raised by committee members who are not even residents of Oak City. //your argument 2

condition 2:
People who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot fully understand the business and politics of the city. After all, only Oak City residents pay city taxes, and therefore only residents understand how that money could best be used to improve the city. //your argument 1 and 3

conclusion:
We recommend, then, that the Committee for a Better Oak City vote to restrict its membership to city residents only. We predict that, without the interference of non-residents, the committee will be able to make Oak City a better place in which to live and work. //you don't have arguments for this

-----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 365 350
No. of Characters: 1873 1500
No. of Different Words: 160 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.371 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.132 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.507 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 128 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.211 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 4.862 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.415 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.594 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.141 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5