"In our region of Trillura, the majority of money spent on the schools that most students attend—the city-run public schools—comes from taxes that each city government collects. The region's cities differ, however, in the budgetary priority they give to p

The argument concludes that Parson City residents place a higher value on providing a good education in public schools than Blue City residents do. The conclusion is based on the premise that parson city has a higher budget allocation to education and schools even though both cities have same residents. The reasoning in the argument is logically flawed, however, as it relies on a number of assumptions which appear to be unsupported due to lack of appropriate evidence.

First, the arguement assumes that both cities have a similar current education level. It ignores the possibility that Blue city might be having a better school and education level compared to Parson city, which could obviate the need for high budgetary allocation to public education. For example, it might be the case that Blue city at present has a very well established school infrastructure compared to Blue City, hence its requirement for budget would be less compared to Blue city, which might be in decreipt condition. In addition, it could be that there are a number of qualified teachers in public schools of Parson city compared to Blue city. This again will call for a high education budget for Blue city. The argument would be strengthened, if the author can provide evidence showing that current infrastructure levels and qualification and strength of teachers in publich schools of both city are identical. Consequently, without this convincing information, the claim stands weak.

Second, the argument ignores the difference in the student population that might exist between two cities. The argument claims that Parson city spends more on education even though the two cities have identical number of residents (not students). This statement is stretched and unsupported. It could be that Parson city has more number of students and children enrolled in schools, hence rendering the need for a higher education budget. The claim would be strengthened if the author can show that the two cities have same number of student population enrolled in public schools.

Finally, the argument ignores other factors that are essential in evaluating the value that residents place on education of their students. The claim that Parson city residents place high value is based on the budgetary allocation, which is done by the government not the residents. Hence, the claim is weak without considering other factors. It might be that parents and guardians in Parson motivate their children better, get involved in their activities, regularly take feedback from teachers and are more involved in education of their children compared to parents of Blue city. Therefore, without this evidence the conclusion cannot be accepted.

In conclusion, the argument that Parson city residents place a high value on education, is rather weak. If the author would have demonstrated that current level of infrastructure and number of students in the two cities are identical along with other required information, the argument would have been greatly strengthened. Without this additional support, however, there is no reason to accept the conclusion in the argument.