11. 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 opponents conclude that the proposed measure would lead to a significant housing price, thus it is unreasonable. However, the proponents of the proposal claim that the influence of the policy would be very small so it would not harm the housing market so that much. While the statement may be reasonable, the assumptions which the conclusions base on is ungrounded, and thus unconvincingly lead to the conclusions. In order to fully evaluate the conclusion, several questions need to be answered.
Citing that the fact that ten years ago the similar prevention of the farming land established in Chestnut County had not caused the decreasing price of the house, the proponents conclude the price decreasing would not happen in Maple County after the measure. The proponents assume that the situation of the house market has not changed over ten years and the same thing would happen after a so long period. However, it is unknown. It is possible that ten years ago the demands of houses is not so serious as it is now. So even the available land disappeared sharply, the house price would not follow. But maybe now the housing market is so susceptible to the house land situations that once the house land decreased, the price would increase dramatically. To determine whether the price would increase sharply or not, the question that whether over so many years the house market still appears what it is used to be need to be answered. And if the answer is yes, the proponents’ conclusion would be much more reasonable.
Even though the time would not affect the house price, the proponents’ conclusion is still unfounded. The proponents make the conclusion by what happened in Chestnut County instead of Maple County. The proponents assumes that the two cities’ situation is very similar that the same thing would happen. But it is unwarranted. It is possible that the population density in Maple County is much larger than that in Chestnut County, or the available housing land in Chestnut County is much more abundant than that in Maple County, then house price in Maple County would still increase sharply after the measure. To fully evaluate the proponents’ conclusion, we should clearly answer the question that whether the house market situation is so similar that the proposal would make the same result. If the answer is yes, the proponents’ conclusion would be much more reasonable.
The opponents predict that once the proposed measure got passed, the housing price in Maple County would increase significantly. They make the prediction by the fact that after the restrictions of housing land adopted in Pine County, the housing price increased sharply there. The opponents assumes that the reason why the housing price increased is the government policy. But it is unwarranted. It is possible that other facts like population increasing or currency inflation leaded to the price increasing greatly instead of the policy. As the causal link is unclear, we can not predict that the price would be influenced greatly by the decreased housing land. If the question that what the main factor of the price change is gets answered, and the answer is the policy, the opponents’ prediction would be much more convincing.
In conclusion, both the proponents and the opponents failed to support their argument and prediction. Without those questions answered clearly, we are not able to tell how the housing price in Maple County would become after the proposal adopted.
| 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 |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 219, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'assume'.
Suggestion: assume
...instead of Maple County. The proponents assumes that the two cities' situation is ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 292, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'assume'.
Suggestion: assume
... increased sharply there. The opponents assumes that the reason why the housing price i...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'thus', 'while', 'in conclusion', 'in fact']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.251552795031 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.144409937888 0.15541462614 93% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0590062111801 0.0836205057962 71% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0978260869565 0.0520304965353 188% => Less adverbs wanted.
Pronouns: 0.0232919254658 0.0272364105082 86% => OK
Prepositions: 0.104037267081 0.125424944231 83% => OK
Participles: 0.0295031055901 0.0416121511921 71% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.84012087392 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0186335403727 0.026700313972 70% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.135093167702 0.113004496875 120% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0326086956522 0.0255425247493 128% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0108695652174 0.0127820249294 85% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3520.0 2731.13054187 129% => OK
No of words: 575.0 446.07635468 129% => OK
Chars per words: 6.12173913043 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.89685180668 4.57801047555 107% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.351304347826 0.378187486979 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.28347826087 0.287650121315 99% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.193043478261 0.208842608468 92% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.128695652174 0.135150697306 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84012087392 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 207.018472906 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.354782608696 0.469332199767 76% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 42.0627366085 52.1807786196 81% => OK
How many sentences: 28.0 20.039408867 140% => OK
Sentence length: 20.5357142857 23.2022227129 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.4362546544 57.7814097925 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.714285714 141.986410481 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5357142857 23.2022227129 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.392857142857 0.724660767414 54% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 48.8835403727 51.9672348444 94% => OK
Elegance: 1.45029239766 1.8405768891 79% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.569031399829 0.441005458295 129% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.16294579635 0.135418324435 120% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0961204118006 0.0829849096947 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.611148819341 0.58762219726 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.183963966451 0.147661913831 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.283336479624 0.193483328276 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109861007832 0.0970749176394 113% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.666703644349 0.42659136922 156% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.115527635831 0.0774707102158 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.451953978361 0.312017818177 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104886111749 0.0698173142475 150% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.33743842365 180% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.82512315271 207% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 15.0 6.46551724138 232% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 5.36822660099 56% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 2.82389162562 248% => OK
Total topic words: 25.0 14.657635468 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.